We all know that despite the heightened Twombly/Iqbal federal pleadings standard, that it doesn’t mean a whole lot if a complaint survives a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. All this means that the court thinks it is plausible that the complaint states a claim. And that the plaintiff gets to keep going. That’s it.
Randy Smith: “Nailing Down Knick and Governmental Takings in Louisiana”
Check this out, a quick read from our New Orleans colleague Randy Smith, his article from the current edition of the Louisiana Bar Journal, “Nailing Down Knick and Governmental Takings in Louisiana.“
Therein, he tells the story (inter alia) of Violet Dock Port (see here and here for two
“Fidelity to the law means going where it leads, and sometimes it leads to the conclusion that a law is unconstitutional.” What Might A “Justice Barrett” Portend For Property Cases?
We have looked through the entire judicial and scholarly oeuvre of SCOTUS nominee Judge Amy Barrett, who today is continuing to run the gauntlet of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Naturally, our scanners were searching for any of her decisions or writings that might give us some clue how a “Justice Barrett” might treat takings and
In Which We Return To The Pendulum Land Podcast To Talk “Snakes on a Plane,” Eminent Domain Songs, And What Might Be Virginia’s First True Regulatory Takings Case
In between talking about eminent domain-y songs, the goofy cult film “Snakes on a Plane” (yes, we really do have a cast-signed poster of that film in our office), and other fun stuff, we returned to the Pendulum Land Podcast for part II of our guest spot, where we also discussed Virginia
Your 2020 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference Bingo Card
In Which We Go Over To The Dark Side: Our Guest Appearance On The Pendulum Land Podcast (SPAM, Takings, Star Trek/Wars, and More!)
We were honored to be a guest on an episode of the Pendulum Land Podcast. Here’s the description from the show notes:
Hawaii inverse condemnation lawyer and William and Mary Law School adjunct professor Rob Thomas joins your hosts to discuss recording his classic single “Smooth” with Carlos Santana, whether the COVID moratoriums on
Considered In Today’s SCOTUS Conference: What Triggers The Takings Statute Of Limitations?
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering our cert petition during the Court’s “long conference.”
This is the case focusing on the interplay between Williamson County‘s “final decision” ripeness rule and the “case and controversy” injury-in-fact standing requirement, and asks: if the government makes its final decision, but the plaintiff isn’t injured until
Takings Places (Preview)
Fed Ct: “[T]he stay-at-home and business closure components of Defendants’ [COVID] orders violate the Due Process Clause” (Applying Rational Basis Review!)
As if to respond to a sibling federal court’s recent order upholding a covid-reaction shut down orders, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania’s opinion in County of Butler v. Wolf, No.2:20-cv-00677 (Sep. 14, 2020) reaches an entirely different conclusion:
The fact is that the lockdowns imposed across the United States
NY Fed Ct: “When faced with a society-threatening epidemic, state officials are empowered to … infringe federal constitutional rights. They may generally do so at their sole discretion and for so long as is necessary.”
The District Court’s bottom line in Lukes Catering Service, LLC v. Cuomo, No. 20-CV-1086 (Sep. 10, 2020)? The New York governor’s emergency orders aimed at coronavirus “imposing quarantines, mandating workforce reductions, closing schools, requiring face-coverings, and restricting activities of all types,” are not takings of the businesses of event, banquet, and catering services that