What better way to bid farewell to 2017 than with a whopper case from the Hawaii Supreme Court? And we’re not exaggerating — this one is really big.
Now you might think that given the amount of time this blog devotes to property interests and property rights, we’d be downright tickled when our home court
Back in October, the William and Mary Law School awarded U. Hawaii lawprof David Callies the Brigham-Kanner Prize at a two-day conference in Williamsburg. Our summary of the conference is posted here.
We spoke at the conference, at the first panel entitled “The Future of Land Regulation and a Tribute to David Callies,”
In Cappel v. Nebraska Dep’t of Natural Resources, No. S-16-1037 (Dec. 22, 2017), the Nebraska Supreme Court concluded the Department’s notices to Cappel pursuant to an interstate water compact which closed off his land’s ability to draw surface water from the Republican River for irrigating his crops was neither a physical nor regulatory taking.
Here’s a case about the denominator in a regulatory takings case from July 2017, just after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Murr v. Wisconsin. We somehow missed the opinion when it was issued, but since we think it must be the first case which attempted to apply the Murr majority’s multi-factor test
…this is might be it: Lampkins Crossing, LLC v. Williamson County, No. 3:17-cv-00906 (Nov. 14, 2017), in which the District Court dismissed substantive due process, procedural due process, and equal protection claims for not being ripe under Williamson County‘s “final decision” prong. The Williamson County case decided on Williamson County grounds.
Now, we’re
The title of West Virginia Lottery v. A-1 Amusement, Inc., No. 16-1047 (Nov. 13, 2017) alone may not give you an indication that this is a takings case, but yes, it’s a takings case.
As the title might indicate, it’s a case involving the state-run lottery and video lottery machines. If we’re reading
The Georgia Supreme Court’s analysis in Diversified Holdings, LLP v. City of Suwanee, No. S17A1140 (Nov. 2, 2017) reminded us of that old trope from logic, “no true Scotsman.”
According to a completely reliable source (Wikipedia):
No true Scotsman is a kind of informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a
In Palmer v. Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, No. 1160630 (July 13, 2017), the Virginia Supreme Court concluded that an out-of-state natural gas company has the power under Virginia’s “entry statute” to enter private property to conduct surveys to determine if the land is suitable for condemnation for a pipeline.
When a property
Here’s the audio recording of the talk we gave to the ABA Section of State and Local Government Law’s Land Use Committee earlier today. (Some of you may note that in the intro we say the talk was on “June 17,” but since that’s tomorrow, we assume you understand that is just an error.)
The
A small but critical mention in the cinema’s greatest closing argument (Dennis Denuto, Esq., above, in The Castle) for the Australia High Court’s decision in Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2), (1992) 175 CLR 1 (1992):
Denuto: It’s the vibe of it.
Judge: Allright, taken. Do you have a precedent which supports this … “vibe?”