To all those who attended today’s seminar, thank you. Here are the links to the cases I mentioned. From the morning session on Case Law Update:
The homeowners threatened with eminent domain for the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, New York have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in Goldstein v. Pataki, 516 F.3d 50 (2d Cir. 2008).
The petition points out the schizophrenic nature of Public Use analysis after Kelo: on one hand, the Court’s holding
In a series of decisions that in any context but eminent domain would be unsurprising, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, held that a property owner whose land is targeted for involuntary acquisition is entitled to be told about it first.
In Harrison Redevelopment Agency v. DeRose, Nos. A-0958-06T2, A-0382-07T2 (Feb. 25, 2008)
The Federalist Society has posted a new edition of Engage – The Journal of Federalist Society Practice Groups, a newsletter-format publication with short scholarly articles on topics such as Administrative Law, Environmental Law and Property Rights, and Civil Rights, among others.
The most interesting article in this edition is Property Rights in the Ninth
Here’s the written order (1.8mb pdf) in Milo v. City of Venice, Case No. 2008 CA 552 SC (Mar. 17, 2008), the Florida case invalidating a municipality’s restrictions on short term rentals that I posted earlier. The case arose after the city’s planning director determined that the local zoning ordinance restricted short term rentals
If you picked up and read a copy of Braun v. Ann Arbor Charter Township, No. 07-1370 (Mar. 13, 2008), an opinion by the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, without having read the briefs of the parties and the decision of the court below, you might not see anything terribly
How often do you see a published opinion from a federal court of appeals that uses the word “hassle” to describe needless litigation? Well, thanks to the irrepressible Chief Judge Kozinski, we now have citeworthy precedent from Clement v. City of Glendale, No. 05-56692 (Mar. 11, 2008):
Officer Young could have avoided years of
What does a fence along the U.S. – Mexico border to deter illegal crossings have to do with eminent domain law? Well, when the government is condemning property for the fence, a lot.
When it decided to put up a fence along the US-Mexico border,Congress gave the Attorney General the power to use eminent domain:
The plaintiff property owner has filed a motion for partial summary judgment in the federal court challenge to Maui County’s “affordable housing” requirement. Kamaole Pointe Development LP v. County of Maui, Civ. No. CV07-00447 DAE LEK (filed Feb. 28, 2008).
The Maui ordinance, enacted last year, imposes a 40% to 50% affordable requirement on
The Garden Island reports that a property owner’s appeal of the County of Kauai’s approval of its permits with allegedly illegal conditions is going forward after the County withdrew its motion to dismiss.
The County Attorney’s Office filed for themotion to dismiss based on the Planning Commission failing to issue a“written decision and order containing