Before last week’s Judiciary Committee hearings on the nomination of Brent Kavanaugh to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, we wrote that the issue of property rights and eminent domain may come up during the hearing, even though Judge Kavanaugh’s actual judicial record on that topic is pretty thin.
We were busy during
A hot — but most often neglected — topic, getting hotter: relocation benefits.
In Osher v. City of St. Louis, No. 17-2402 (Sep. 6, 2018), the U.S. Court of Appeals joined the Fourth Circuit in its conclusion that the Uniform Relocation Act provisions are mere guidelines (insert our oft-repeated Pirate’s Code reference here), and
Come on, let’s be candid here. When we pick up an opinion filled with statutory and regulatory jargon — replete with agency acronyms — our eyes see the words, but our brains process them like they are being spoken by the adults in the Peanuts cartoons.
But then we spot the words “eminent domain”
You’ve known for a while that Palm Springs, California, specifically the Renaissance Palm Springs Hotel (a resort facility, but right in town, so you will have many options for “off campus” activities like art museums, the aerial tram, golf, and whatever suits your fancy, and close-in to the Palm Springs Airport), is the venue
According to this story (“California moves closer to taking public pathway from billionaire Vinod Khosla“) in the Santa Cruz Sentinel, the State of California is considering exercising eminent domain to take an easement for public access over his San Mateo County property to access Martins Beach.
This is the case that resulted
Kearney had her property taken. The school district doing the taking said it wanted to put a septic system on the property, and so commissioned a percolation study. But then it decided that instead, it would connect to a sewer system. The state court jury believed neither side’s appraiser completely, rejecting both Kearney’s appraisal ($1.4
We think you should pay attention to the South Carolina Supreme Court’s opinion in South Carolina DOT v. Powell, No. 2016-000594 (Aug. 8, 2018). Indeed, it is a short opinion, and worth a read in its entirety. The reason why we think it is important is that it analyzes an issue that confuses many: the
We usually don’t cover trial court orders, but this one is short, and, we think, worth your time reading.
The issue before the North Dakota District Court (Ward County) was the award of attorneys’ fees following a successful necessity challenge by a landowner. In North Dakota, the award of fees and costs to
A quick one from the Nevada Supreme Court (pictured above).
In Clark County v. HQ Metro, LLC, No. 71877 (Aug. 2, 2018), the unanimous court concluded that the owner of property at the time the condemnor obtained an order of possession (in Nevada, the term apparently is “order of occupation”) is the party entitled
Super Takings (or Due Process) Nerd alert: what should-be-famous-but-isn’t SCOTUS case involved what is now this property?
Extra credit: why is the case important?
Location clues are all in photo.
Answer and more details is a subsequent post.