Everyone is distracted today by the too-big-to-fail “Obamacare” ruling by the 6-3 Supreme Court (or, as Justice Scalia called it “SCOTUScare“), in which the Court concluded that the vibe of a statute matters more than its actual language, and the Court’s ruling in the “disparate impact” fair housing case (speaking of which
Upcoming APA Webinar: 2015 Planning Law Review
On Wednesday, July 1, 2015, the American Planning Association is putting on the 2015 Planning Law Review, a program highlighting the most important and topical cases decided by the courts recently. Here’s the program description:
Planning feels the impact of decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, federal district courts, and state courts. How will
Here’s Why The Supreme Court Held The Raisin Marketing Order Was Unconstitutional…
… look no further than the above report from The Daily Show.
Yeah, it’s satire and does at times make light of a serious case, but the USDA was trying to defend a regulation that
Raisin Round-Up
Update: here’s more Horne talk, in addition to our own initial thoughts in the above video and this post (“Magna Raisins: 8-1 SCOTUS Says There’s A Taking, But Not All Agree On Remedy“):
- “Today’s Other Supreme Court Property Rights Decision” (our post about City of Los Angeles v. Patel, No.
Podcast: Leviathan Shrugged? The Supreme Court’s Raisin Takings Case
Here’s the podcast of our recent talk to the American Bar Association’s Section of State and Local Government Law about the (then) upcoming decision in Horne v. Dep’t of Agriculture, No. 14-275. Transcript here, if you’d prefer to read it.
This is a preview of the decision. But since we made some predictions
New Article: “Eminent Domain in The Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina”
A new article worthy of your time from The Urban Lawyer, the law review published by the ABA Section of State and Local Government Law: “The Power of Eminent Domain in the Aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: Should Common Interest Communities Be Compensated for the Loss of Asssments,” by James R. Conde.
The
Fed Cir: “Economically Beneficial Use” Means More Than Someone Might Buy The Property
Third time around for Lost Tree’s takings case against the federal government on this blog.
The first was the Federal Circuit’s decision concluding that a single Florida parcel owned by the plaintiff was the relevant parcel against which the impact of the Corps of Engineers’ denial of a § 404 wetlands dredge and fill permit is
New Cert Petition: Revisiting Tohono And § 1500 In Federal Takings Claims
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following, a takings claim against the federal government which was dismissed by the Federal Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1500, the statute which deprives the Court of Federal Claims of jurisdiction over a case if a related case is pending in another court at the time
Guest Post: HAWSCT Oral Arguments In Koa Ridge – Is The State Prohibited From Rezoning “Potential” Important Ag Land?
Last week, the Hawaii Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Sierra Club v. Castle and Cooke Homes Hawaii, Inc., No. SCAP-13-0000765, a case involving a challenge by the usual suspects to a State Land Use Commission “boundary amendment” (aka state “rezoning” to those of you not familiar with Hawaii’s top-heavy state land use planning
Protip: File Your CFC Complaint First, And Then File Your District Court Action – Even If It Makes No Sense
Not much new in the Federal Circuit’s opinion in Resource Investments, Inc. v. United States, No. 14-5069 (May 12, 2015), which upheld the dismissal of a Court of Federal Claims takings complaint for lack of jurisdiction under of 28 U.S.C. § 1500.
That statute, as federal takings mavens know (and as the Supreme Court