On this morning’s drive-time program, we joined KHVH’s Rick Hamada about whether Hawaii might adopt California’s version of inverse condemnation liability in wildfire cases. We also tried to clear up a few misconceptions (gad, I used “disinformation,” a term I try to eschew).
Here’s the program description:
Inverse Condemnation and Maui Wildfires: A Conversation with
Two years ago, Owners’ Counsel of America endowed a scholarship in the name of its founder, property rights advocate and trial lawyer Toby Prince Brigham (1934-2021). The scholarship is for a second- or third- year law student to attend the annual three-day ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference (the upcoming Conference will be
We recently attended the American Bar Association’s Annual Meeting in Denver to speak at the Section of State and Local Government Law’s program, “The 100th Anniversary of Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon: How the Takings Clause Became the Primary Check on Government Power When SCOTUS Abandoned Review Under the Due Process and Contracts Clauses
The Eleventh Circuit’s short opinion (really short – 1.5 pages) in Sabal Trail Transmission, LLC v. 3-921 Acres of Land, No. 22-10435 (July 25, 2023), is straightforward: to resolve whether a Florida property owner subject to a private condemnor taking under the federal Natural Gas Act has a property right in attorneys fees and
A short (but interesting) one from the Ohio Supreme Court. In State ex rel. Balunek v. Marchbanks, No. 2021-1469 (July 25, 2023), the court held that a physical takings claim alleging the DOT cut off access to property was ripe, even though the owner might have applied for permit to gain access.
As part
The latest in a case we’ve been following doesn’t get to the substantive issue: is a local park district authorized to take private property for a bike path when the statute authorizes takings for “conservation of natural resources?”
Instead, the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for a familiar reason: lack of a final judgment.
When a condemnor is told “no” (or voluntarily drops an eminent domain lawsuit), many jurisdictions require it to pay attorney fees to the parties on the target end of the vs.
Colorado is one of those jurisdictions, and as the Colorado Court of Appeals noted in Mulberry Frontage Metro. Dist. v. Sunstate Equip. Co.
A big thanks to friend and colleague Paul Henry for bringing to our attention this article by Andrew Stuttaford, UFOs and Eminent Domain.
No, it (unfortunately) is not the latest tenure-making scholarly law journal article (but we can dream, can’t we?), but a piece in National Review.
It details a proposal to release
Every law school graduate surely remembers that 1L Contracts case about the two ships named “Peerless” and the doctrine of mutual mistake.
In Marchbanks v. Ice House Ventures, LLC, No. 2022-0047 (June 8, 2023), the Ohio Supreme Court rejected the DOT’s claim that a previously-agreed-upon agreement to settle an eminent domain action did not
Update: someone blinked – between the time we drafted this post and the time is actually posted, we understand that this case settled. But the “spite takings” issue remains of interest, so we’re leaving this post up.
——————————————————————————————
You already know about the prior public use issue, often arising in government-to-government takings.