Here’s what we are reading this Tuesday:
The California Supreme Court’s relatively short unanimous opinion yesterday in City of Oroville v. Superior Court, No. S243247 (Aug. 15, 2019) may have a bigger impact outside of that case than within in.
While that is undoubtedly true in many decisions by a precedential court of last resort, we highlight that here because inverse
We’re about to get underway with the fall semester at William and Mary Law School, where we’re again teaching an upper-division course, Eminent Domain and Property Rights.
We’ve more than doubled the size of last year’s enrollment, so it looks like the word is getting out. We cover not only eminent domain and
Mark your calendars for Thursday, August 22, 2019, 2 – 3pm ET, for a free ABA program, “When the Floods and Fires Come: Landowner’s Property Damage Claims.” This session, produced by the Section of Litigation and organized by our Damon Key colleague Mark Murakami. Featured speakers are our colleagues Anthony Della
Here’s our Federalist Society blog post on Knick, “After More Than 30 Years, the Supreme Court Reopens the Door To Federal Takings Claims.”
Check it out, takings fans.
Here is the motion asking the Hawaii Supreme Court for leave to file an amicus curiae brief (and the proposed brief) we filed earlier today in a case we’ve been following.
The question is the applicable statute of limitations for regulatory takings claims under the Hawaii Constitution’s “takings or damagings” clause. The case started
Synchronicity (Jung, not The Police). Serendipity. Lattice of coincidence. Whatever you call it, sometimes things seem to come in waves.
So it seems with the statue of limitations for inverse and regulatory takings claims this week. We had not dealt with the issue for a while. Radio silence. Then boom! The
Recently, we requested crowdsourcing of this year’s “come to the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain Conference video.” Instead of doing the video ourselves, we asked folks to “please send a short clip of you and/or your colleagues telling us why you think the Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference is the place to be
Leave it to Federal Circuit Judge Timothy Dyk — who, as far as we can tell, has never once ruled against the government in a takings case — to conclude that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Knick v. Township of Scott, 139 S. Ct. 2162 (2019) actually works to the detriment of
Usually, when we’re scanning the daily email from the Federal Circuit for takings decisions of interest, we look for “United States” as the defendant, and our eyes glaze over the other cases on the court’s docket such as patent matters. But today, we were rewarded: a takings issue in a patent matter.