At its upcoming April 30, 2010 conference, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering the cert petition in a case we’ve been following since it was decided by the Court of Federal Claims. In Palmyra Pacific Seafoods, L.L.C. v. United States, No. 09-766 (cert. petition filed Dec. 28, 2009), the Court is presented with the
Court of Federal Claims | Federal Circuit
Sunday Round-Up
What we’re reading today:
- “Setting boundaries for property rights” — an opinion piece in the National Law Journal by our friend Timothy Sandefur about the Florida beachfront takings case, Stop the Beachfront Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dep’t of Environmental Protection, No. 08-11 (cert. granted. June 15, 2009). Highlight: “There must be some
…
Navigational Servitude May Not Be A “Blanket Exception” To The Takings Clause…But It’s Still A Big One
In Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U.S. 164 (1979), a case won by my Damon Key partners Charlie Bocken and Diane Hastert, the Court held the navigational servitude does not create a “blanket exception to the Takings Clause whenever Congress exercises its Commerce Clause authority to promote navigation.” The servitude gives the…
Court Of Federal Claims: Feds Liable For $5.8M Inverse Condemnation For Flooding
I don’t know of anyone who looks forward to reading 61-page single-spaced opinions. I know I sure don’t. But that’s the nature of the beast in decisions after a bench trial by trial courts, which are tasked with processing the facts and applying the law after hearing days, weeks, or months of evidence and argument.
Feds Likely To Seek Cert In Casitas (Water Rights Taking Case)
It looks like the federal government will likely seek U.S. Supreme Court review of Casitas Municipal Water District v. United States, 543 F.3d 1276 (Fed. Cir. 2008). As noted here, the SG’s office has sought and received two extensions of time and the cert petition is now due by July 17, 2009.
In…
Federal Circuit: Plaintiff Alleged Property Right To Develop Land
The US Court of Appeals has reversed the Court of Federal Claims’ dismissal of a takings case, holding the right to develop land is property protected by the Takings Clause. In Schooner Harbor Ventures, Inc. v. United States, No. 2008-5084 (June 16, 2009), the property owner claimed a designation of its property (Site 28)…
Materials And Links From Today’s Water Law Seminar
To those who attended today’s seminar “Integrating Water Law and Land Use Planning,” thank you. The materials from my session on “Water Rights, Property Rightsand the Law of Settled Expectations” are below.
- Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U.S. 164 (1979) – the Hawaii Kai Marina case – physical invasions, regulatory takings, and interference
…
Guest Post: Of Shoes and Ships, Eggs and Farms; Or, Penn Central Through the Looking Glass
Economist Bill Wade offers his thoughts on the recent (and latest) Rose Acre decision by the Federal Circuit, a case we summarized here.
__________________________________
Of shoes and ships, eggs and farms; Or, Penn Central through the Looking Glass
by William W. Wade, Ph.D.
Fans of arcane takings decisions will not find a more economically…
Federal Circuit: Commercial Fishing Ban Frustrated Contract, But Is Not A Taking
Thanks to my fellow Damon Key land user Greg Kugle for letting me know the Federal Circuit has affirmed Palmyra Pacific Seafoods, L.L.C. v. United States, 80 Fed. Cl. 228 (Jan. 22, 2008), a case we summarized here. The Federal Circuit’s opinion is available here.
The court held that licenses to use…
Court Of Federal Claims Round-Up
Here are the latest opinions of interest from the Court of Federal Claims, which has nationwide jurisdiction over inverse condemnation and regulatory takings claims against the federal government where the compensation sought exceeds $10,000:
- Energy Security of America Corp. v. United States, No 08-373C (Feb. 27, 2009) – “inherently unknowable” for purposes of
…
