We add a flowchart to this post because the Washington Supreme Court on page 15 of its opinion in Yim v. City of Seattle, No. 95813 (Wash. Nov. 14, 2019) (em banc) (Yim I), includes a flowchart that purports to solve the regulatory takings puzzle once and for all.
Really.
You should
Check this out. The Complaint that we’ve been meaning to post for a while, filed last month in a Los Angeles U.S. District Court, alleging that California’s new rent control laws are a taking, among other things.
Are rent control laws takings? Yes, pretty sure about that. But will courts conclude that they are takings?
Here’s the OA video (courtesy of the Michigan Supreme Court) from last week’s arguments in what we’re calling the “keep the change” case.
That’s the one where the government is arguing that after a property owner was late paying $8.00 in property taxes, the government is not only entitled to foreclose on the property, but
Check out this story by JD Morris (“PG&E renews push to avoid strict liability for 2017, 2018 fires“) in the San Francisco Chronicle, about the recent (and ongoing) California wildfires, and the issue of what has been called the “unusual,” “unique,” and “so-called” doctrine of inverse condemnation in that state’s courts.
We think the Connecticut Supreme Court’s opinion in Mayer-Whitman v. Zoning Board of Appeals, No. SC 19972 (Nov. 5, 2019) is worth a read, even if it does not break new ground, because it does a good job of explaining some basic principles.
Quick story: Breunich had a house. It didn’t conform to height
Registration underway, so come join us! Agenda full of hot topics in takings and appraisal law! The best national faculty! Renew friendships, and make new colleagues! And Nashville!
Download the brochure and make your plans for January. (Don’t wait, we’ve sold out the past three years.)
Here’s a two-fer that covers very difficult and unsettled subjects in takings law: judicial takings and rent control.
In this cert petition, New York property owners assert that the New York Court of Appeals (the state’s highest court for those of you who do not watch Law & Order (dun-dun)), took private
We’re back again at that supposed distinction between the police power and the eminent domain power, which reminds us of that old tale about President Lyndon Johnson:
After reviewing a contingent of Viet Nam-bound Marines in California, Lyndon Johnson strode purposefully toward what he thought was his helicopter. “That’s your helicopter over there, sir,”
With the ongoing wildfire dramas ongoing across California, several of you have asked us to collect the posts we have done about inverse condemnation liability in one place. So here you go:
Here’s the State of Hawaii’s response to an amicus brief we filed in a case that asks the Hawaii Supreme Court to resolve the question of what statute of limitations governs takings claims under the state constitution. We argued that constitutional claims such as these might not be subject to legislatively-imposed statutes of