Earlier this year, I had the honor of moderating a panel speaking about transportation sharing legal issues at the University of Hawaii Law Review‘s sharing economy symposium. The editors have been hard at work since, and the symposium issue is being printed as we speak.
They also permitted me to pen this little missive,
So how does a property lawyer salve the wounds of the last few days, which saw a really bad Supreme Court ruling in a regulatory takings case, and shortly thereafter the justices deny review of your just compensation petition while you just happen to be in Los Angeles, California?
Langer’s Deli, that’s how.
After Murr, the pending cert petition in Lost Tree was D.O.A., and today, the Court made it official. Cert denied. We thought that the Federal Circuit’s denominator analysis was the better one (although pretty much anything would have been better than what Justice Kennedy and his Immortals came up with in Murr).
What to make the Justice Kennedy-authored 5 justice majority opinion in Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214 (June 23, 2017)?
There, the majority adopted — maybe “created from whole cloth” would be a more accurate description — a multifactor test for determining the “larger parcel’ or “denominator” in regulatory takings cases where the owner possesses
Update: Here are my first thoughts on Murr – “Justice Kennedy’s Social Justice Warrior Test for Takings Clause Property in Murr v. Wisconsin“
The title alone should tell you this was authored by Justice Kennedy, which means that, as we thought it might do, today the U.S. Supreme Court held in Murr
SCOTUSblog takes note of our cert petition in Bay Point Properties, Inc. v. Mississippi Transportation Commission, No. 16-1077 (cert. petition filed Mar. 3, 2017), a case which seeks U.S. Supreme Court review of a decision by the Mississippi Supreme Court. We represent the Petitioner.
In the “Petitions to Watch” segment, Aurora
Here’s the latest case in an issue we’ve been tracking, whether takings plaintiffs who bring major claims for just compensation against the federal government must do so in the Article I Court of Federal Claims, or can bring the claim in an Article III district court. The Sixth Circuit recently held that the feds have sovereign
No sleeping under the bridges of Paris!
In Ada County Highway District v. Brooke View, No. 43452 (May 23, 2017), the Idaho Supreme Court held that construction damage caused by the Highway District to property adjacent to — but not part of — a road project for which it took property, was not covered
Here’s the audio recording of the talk we gave to the ABA Section of State and Local Government Law’s Land Use Committee earlier today. (Some of you may note that in the intro we say the talk was on “June 17,” but since that’s tomorrow, we assume you understand that is just an error.)
The
Update: the audio recording is posted here.
* * * *
Here are the links to the cases we mentioned in today’s ABA State and Local Government Law Section presentation, “Takings: Emerging Issues.”
The “Larger Parcel” In Regulatory Takings (and Eminent Domain)