Here are some initial reports of today’s unanimous Supreme Court decision in Arkansas Game and Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (Dec. 4, 2012), which held that government induced flooding could be a taking, even if the inundation of the land is temporary. We filed an amicus brief in the case supporting the property
Court of Federal Claims | Federal Circuit
Unanimous SCOTUS: Temporary Flooding Could Be A Taking
This just in: the Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion (authored by Justice Ginsburg) in Arkansas Game and Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (Dec. 4, 2012), holding that government induced flooding is a taking, even if temporary.
The Court roundly rejected the Federal Circuit’s conclusion that flooding caused by the Corps…
LA Times On The Raisin Takings Case
More on Horne v. U.S.D.A., No. 12-123 (cert. granted Nov. 20, 2012) from the Los Angeles Times: Supreme Court to hear California raisin growers’ case.
Three Takings Cases This Term – What’s The Deal?
As you know, yesterday the Supreme Court granted cert in Horne v. U.S.D.A., No. 12-123 (cert. granted Nov. 20, 2012), the third takings claim this season. As this article asked, what, if anything, is going on? Is it just “serendipity” or a “return to the norm” as two lawprofs quoted in the article…
SCOTUS Grants Cert In California Raisins Takings Case
It looks like our crystal balls are working.
Wait, that didn’t come out the way we quite intended, so let’s rephrase. Recently, we and others suggested paying attention to the property rights cases on the Supreme Court’s cert docket, paying particular attention to a case out of the Ninth Circuit, Horne v. United States …
Federal Circuit: Federal Gov’t Adequately Represents Enviros’ Rights
We love any opinion that begins with “[t]his case’s story started in 1942…” A typical long-fact-pattern takings case, perhaps? Well, not quite. This case, which we’ve been meaning to post for a while, deals with who is entitled to intervene in a takings case.
Reply Brief In Fed Cir Rails-to-Trails Appeal: Statute Of Limitations Doesn’t Start To Run Until Gov’t Gives Notice Of The Taking
In July, we posted the opening brief in Ladd v. United States, the case in which the Court of Federal claims dismissed the property owners’ Fifth Amendment takings claim stemming from a rail conversion. The CFC held that the claim was filed past the six-year Tucker Act statute of limitations even though the government…
Oral Argument Recording In SCOTUS Flood Takings Case
The Oyez Project has posted the recording in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012), the takings case argued earlier this week in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Check it out here. We posted our summary of the petitioner’s arguments here, and will be posting…
Does The NY Times Know That Most Floodwaters Eventually Recede (Or Might?)
The New York Times editorial page has weighed in on Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012), the takings case argued earlier this week in the U.S. Supreme Court.
And, no surprise, in When Flooding Is Not a Taking, the great beneficiary of eminent domain…
Of Picnics And Floods: Oral Arguments In SCOTUS Takings Case, Part I
Here’s the transcript of Wednesday’s argument in Arkansas Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, No. 11-597 (cert. granted Apr. 2, 2012).
BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front): we’re predicting the property owner win with a minimum six-Justice majority (perhaps more), with a narrowly drawn opinion vacating the Federal Circuit’s conclusion that temporary…