Today, I filed an amicus brief (750k pdf) in the appeal regarding “Act 73,” the state statute (codifed here and here) which declared that shoreline land naturally accreted belongs to the State of Hawaii and is public property.
Act 73 overturned the age-old rule of shoreline accretion and erosion, which held that beachfront owners
The Washington (state) Supreme Court, in Sleasman v. City of Lacey (No. 77590-7, Feb. 8, 2007), decided what it means to have a developed parcel. Actually, the court determined what the terms “undeveloped” and “partially developed” mean within the context of a local ordinance that regulates tree removal on such property. The opinion is a
The transcript of the oral argument in Sole v. Wyner (No. 06-531) (docket listing here) has been posted on the SCOTUS web site here. That case presents the issue of whether a party who wins apreliminary injunction — but ultimately loses the case — has”prevailed” under a federal statute that allows a
In Hawaii Home Infusion Assoc. v. Befitel, (No. 27256, Apr. 16, 2007), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that the venue provisions in the declaratory judgment section of the Hawaii Administrative Procedures Act, Haw. Rev. Stat. § 91-7, are jurisdictional, and such actions must be brought in the judicial circuit in which the petitioner
UH Law Professor Carl Christensen has kindly invited me to discuss takings law with the students in his historic preservation seminar on Monday. I think a good starting point is the granddaddy of historic preservation/regulatory takings decisions, Penn Central Trans. Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978), a case that highlights
New Jersey Eminent Domain blog posts a good summary of the Robbins v. Wilkie case currently pending in the US Supreme Court:
The critical issue for Robbins and other property owners asserting their 5th amendment rights is whether they can do so without fear of retaliation by government officials. Many property owners affected by eminent
In a cert decision issued today in Wailuku Agribusiness Co., Inc. v. Ah Sam (No. 25930, Mar. 30, 2007), Supreme Court of Hawaii set forth the legal requirements for adverse possession in situations where there may be cotenants on the property claimed to have been adversely possessed.
I won’t get into the facts of
Martin Kasindorf at USA Today has written a story Land-use debate ugly in paradise about the competing sides about a proposed development on Molokai:
“There is trouble in paradise,” says Annie VanEps, 59, an art gallery manager who moved from California five yearsago. “This has split our island. Can’t we have one island that’s notdeveloped?”
Which issue is more important when it comes to utilizing scarce federal judicial resources:
While Tribe said he sensed the justices were sympathetic to his Fifth Amendment argument, they were wary of creating new ways to sue government employees.
“There is a considerable amount of hostility for the possibility of opening up the floodgates of litigation against government officials,&rdquo