Late last year, we posted the Complaint in a federal court lawsuit originating on Kauai. In that case, the owner of a property that has been designated for resort development for 35 years asserted that the adoption of a Charter amendment by the County’s voters and a follow-on ordinance adopted by the County Council that
It Begins: Plan To Seize Underwater Mortgages Challenged In Federal Court
We’ve commented on the various plans (mostly backed by a private venture capital outfit out of San Francisco) to have local municipalities seize underwater-but-performing morrtgages by eminent domain (see here and here, for example). Apparently the brainchild of Cornell lawprof Robert Hockett and sold as a “no lose” situation (see “Paying Paul
Cal App: “Inclusionary Housing” Money Exaction Might Just Survive Low-Level Scrutiny
Here’s one we’ve been meaning to post for a few days. In California Building Industry Ass’n v. City of San Jose, No. H0338563 (June 6, 2013), the California Court of Appeal (6th District) held that the city’s affordable housing exaction might survive judicial scrutiny because it was designed to promote the development of affordable
Upcoming ABA CLE: “Supreme Court Takings – A First Look At Koontz And Horne”
Mark your calendars for July 12, 2013 for our CLE teleconference on “Supreme Court Takings: A First Look at Koontz and Horne,” sponsored by the ABA’s State and Local Government Law Section. We’ll start at 1:00 pm ET (Noon CT, 11:00 am MT, 10:00 am PT, 7:00 am HT). Here’s the program
Teleconference Links: Do You Dare Even Say “Eminent Domain” After Kelo?
Here are links to the cases and other materials we spoke about at today’s teleconference with Professor Dan Mandelker and my OCA colleague Dwight Merriam:
- Ilagan v. Ungacta (Guam v. 162.40 Square Meters of Land)
- “Solely” for economic development? Missouri ex rel. Jackson v. Dolan
- Ilya Somin, The Judicial Reaction to Kelo, 4
LA’s Reply Brief In SCOTUS Homeless Property Case
As we mentioned yesterday when we posted the Brief in Opposition, here’s the Reply Brief of Petitioner (the City of Los Angeles) in City of Los Angeles v. Lavan, No 12-1073 (cert. petition filed Feb. 28, 2013), the case in which the Ninth Circuit in a 2-1 panel decision held that the city
Brief In Opposition In SCOTUS Homeless Property Case
Here’s the Brief in Opposition filed recently in City of Los Angeles v. Lavan, No 12-1073 (cert. petition filed Feb. 28, 2013), the case in which the Ninth Circuit in a 2-1 panel decision held that the city could not presume that property owned by homeless people in the Skid Row area was abandoned
Third Circuit: Closing A Business To Remove Unexploded Munitions Is Not A Taking
If you haven’t figured out by now, we like takings claims. We really do. But here’s one where we think the Third Circuit reached the right result when it concluded that there was no compensable taking. National Amusements, Inc. v. Borough of Palmyra, No. 12-1630 (May 9, 2013).
Why? Because when there may be
Materials From Today’s Virginia Eminent Domain Conference
For those of you attending the Virginia Eminent Domain Conference, here’s the expanded papers on “Tough Takings Questions: Regulatory Takings, Zoning Issues and Judicial Takings” and Public Use issues.
Use the password provided at the conference to open the pdf’s. It’s the same p/w for both. If you forgot the password, email me.
For those who did not attend, sorry folks, there are some benefits to coming to a conference! Y’all are going to have to wait for a bit — after a decent interval to allow the attendees to get their money’s worth, we’ll remove the password.
For more about the cases and books we discussed yesterday during my presentation on “Virginia’s Place in National Eminent Domain Trends, check these out:
- Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984) (private takings, Public Use Clause).
- Lingle v. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc., 544 U.S. 528 (2005) (gas station rent control, and the demise of the “substantially advance” test as a takings test).
- Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U.S. 164 (1979) (navigable waters, regulatory takings).
- Livingston v. Virginia Dep’t of Transportation, 726 S.E.2d 264 (Va. 2012) (flooding and taking liability).
- James Ely, The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights (1998) (read this book!).
Continue Reading Materials From Today’s Virginia Eminent Domain Conference
Fifth Circuit: City Not Required To Give Notice Prior To Demolishing Building If It Merely Believed There Was An Emergency
A short one from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In RBII, L.P. v. City of San Antonio, No. 11-50626 (Apr. 23, 2013), the court overturned a jury verdict that the city violated the due process and Fourth Amendment rights of a property owner when the city demolished its building without