Unsurprisingly there isn’t a lot there in the majority opinion in Bowers Dev. LLC v. Oneida Cnty. Indus, Dev. Agency, No. 2022-00744 (Dec. 23, 2022) (this is from the New York courts after all, which don’t seem to write long opinions), but we’re posting it so you can compare the majority with the dissent.
Wyoming: When You Settle An Eminent Domain Fight By Waiving All Future Claims, You Can’t Take Advantage Of A Reclaim Statute
Here’s one that’s holding over from 2022, but we wanted to make sure to post because it’s a good reminder that when you settle a case, you settle the case.
Wyoming is one of those jurisdictions that has one of those “I want it back” provisions, where if property is not actually used for X
Ohio: Necessity Is Judged By The Property Taken, Not The Overall Project
Thanks to a colleague giving us a heads-up, we’re starting 2023 with a neat case.
In Ohio Power Co. v. Burns, No. 2021-1168 (Dec. 29, 2022), the Ohio Supreme Court declined to apply a statutory presumption of necessity to the power company’s efforts to use eminent domain to expand the scope of several existing
You Can’t Just Say “Redevelopment” – Take Now, Decide Later Isn’t A Public Use
A classically short opinion from the New York Supreme Court (Appellate Division, Fourth District) in HBC Victor LLC v. Town of Victor, No. 683 (Dec. 23, 2022). (So short that we were tempted to simply post the opinion and let you read it, because it will probably take you just as long to read
No Necessity: Landowner Met Burden – Condemnor Did Not Consider Other Sites
Check this out, a decision upholding a necessity challenge to a taking.
Necessity, you say? What’s this? Aren’t necessity challenges subject to an even more deferential judicial standard of review than the rational basis test applied to declarations of public use? Didn’t the U.S. Supreme Court in Adirondack Ry. Co. v. New York, 176
CA9: Land Use Is A “Sensitive Area Of Social Policy” So We’re Gonna Let A Local Govt Bleed The Property Owner Out
Here’s another one from the Ninth Circuit, argued on what one advocate called “land use day at the Ninth Circuit” (except, unlike the other two cases argued that day, the decision in this one gets published).
In Gearing v. City of Half Moon Bay, No. 21-16688 (Dec. 8, 2022), the panel upheld
Ohio: Property Got Nominated Real Good – Saying You Want To Put Up Site For UNESCO Designation Is Enough To Support Taking
Check out the Ohio Supreme Court’s 6-1 opinion in State ex rel. Ohio History Connection v. Moundbuilders Country Club Co., No. 2020-0191 (Dec. 7, 2022), in which the court held held that the taking of the Country Club’s lease for the property served a public use.
Court News Ohio beat us to the punch
Hawaii 5-80: Land Use Law At The University Of Hawaii
Starting in January, we’ll be teaching the venerated, and oh-so-important Land Use course (Law 580) at the University of Hawaii’s Law School.
We’re at least temporarily stepping into some mighty big slippers (this is Hawaii, so we don’t always wear shoes), as this is the course that our mentor Professor David Callies taught for
Here’s The Program For The 40th ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference, Feb 1-4, 2023, Austin
Here it is, the official agenda and program for the 40th ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference, February 2-4, 2023 (with a special event the evening of Wednesday, February 1, 2023 to entice you to arrive early).
Here’s the brochure with the complete agenda, schedule, and faculty listing. But to tempt you,
CAFED Hears Arguments In Two Takings Cases
Ideker Farms, Inc. v. United States, No. 21-1849
As written up in the FedCircuitBlog (a must-follow for all you federal takings mavens):
It concerns the federal government’s liability for taking private property. Specifically, in this case, the Federal Circuit will review the conclusion of the Court of Federal Claims that the government’s action was