When you think “LA” or Southern California, what comes to mind? Things like “the hills of Beverly Hills, the Hollywood Hills, and the Los Angeles basin, including the Hollywood sign, the Griffith Observatory, downtown Los Angeles, and … Mount Baldy,” perhaps?
Or maybe, like us, you think of prehistoric elephants stuck in tar.
But
The Supreme Court has declined to review the Second Circuit’s summary order upholding the dismissal of a federal court regulatory takings claim on Williamson County ripeness grounds.
In this order, the Court denied cert, over the dissent of Justice Thomas (joined by Justice Kennedy). We’ve said here many times why Williamson County is a
The Pribeagus asserted the County’s failure to maintain a road caused their home to be flooded repeated. They sued in inverse condemnation, including in their suit a claim for damages both to their real property and their personal property.
The trial court kept the Pribeagus from introducing evidence of the value of the personal property
Continuing with our posting of the amicus briefs in Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, the “parcel as a whole” case now being considered by the Supreme Court, here is the brief filed in support of the property owner by several western states, principally authored by lawprof Ilya Somin.
Rather than summarize the brief here
The amicus briefs supporting the property owners/petitioners in Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, the “parcel as a whole” case now being considered by the Supreme Court, are rolling in.
Here’s the first one, the amici brief for the Cato Institute and the Owners’ Counsel of America. [Disclosure: we represent OCA on this filing.]
Here’s the property owners’ Merits Brief, filed earlier this week in the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court is considering the “parcel as a whole” doctrine in regulatory takings (also known as the “denominator” issue).
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals held that the owners did not have their property taken because
A nondescript corner of what could be just about any urban city street in America. Nothing of overwhelming interest, just the usual commercial buildings, traffic signals, and small businesses. A self-storage facility. Pretty typical in a Commercial district. Here, the “C-4 District.”
Nothing at all, in fact, to indicate that just over a century ago, this was
Today’s post is by colleague William Wade, an economist in Nashville, Tennessee, who has thought a lot — and written extensively — about the just compensation and damages available in inverse condemnation and regulatory takings cases.
He provides his thoughts on a recent trial court decision in a closely-watched Texas water case, in which the
The photo above has pretty much nothing to do with today’s case, except it also involves a Texas barbecue joint. More on the photo after a short review of the Texas Court of Appeals’ decision in Lenox Barbeque and Catering, Inc. v. Metro. Transit Authority of Harris Cnty., No. 14-14-00383-CV (Feb. 23, 2016).
Read this: “The Accidental Abstention Doctrine: After Thirty Years, the Case for Diverting Federal Takings Claims to State Court Under Williamson County Has Yet to Be Made,” by R.S. Radford and Jennifer Fry Thompson, published in the most recent edition of the Baylor Law Review.
If the title weren’t enough to