Details soon. In the meantime, get your earlier registration discount.
Upcoming Webinar – Knick Picking Regulatory Takings: Did the Court Right a Wrong, or Wrong a Right? (free for State and Local Govt Law Land Use Committee members)
The Land Use Committee of the ABA’s Section of State and Local Government Law is sponsoring a free (for Section members) informal webinar about the latest in takings law:
Knick Picking Regulatory Takings: Did the Court Right a Wrong, or Wrong a Right?
Friday, July 26 | 2 – 2:30pm ET
Here’s hoping you can
Friday Round-Up: California Inverse Condemnation, Lawprof Epstein Litigates Public Trust, Property In Ecology, And More
Here’s what we’re reading this Friday:
- Plaintiffs Cannot Bring Inverse Condemnation Claims Before a Public Agency Makes a Final Determination on Allowable Development – California Land Use & Development Law Report
- One reason for the high cost of housing in California may surprise you — overregulation – Los Angeles Times (Barista’s note: is anyone surprised
Dirt Lawyer CLE At ABA Annual Meeting (San Francisco)
If you are going to be attending the ABA Annual Meeting in San Francisco next month, here are some of the CLE and other programs of interest to property, land use, and eminent domain types, sponsored by our Section, the State and Local Govt Law Section:
Thursday, Aug. 8
- Knick Overrules Williamson County: What
Knick, Entirely In Memes
We’ve resisted for as long as we can.
Here’s our take at telling the Williamson County and Knick story, 100% in memes.
Why, you may rightly ask?
Well, it started with our Knick amicus brief, which included a meme that we thought captured well the injustice of property owners being prohibited by Williamson
What The US Supreme Court’s Property Rights Decision Means For Hawaii’s Property Owners
We’ve already set out our general thoughts about the Supreme Court’s decision in Knick v. Township of Scott in a series of posts on the case. But we haven’t yet noted what the case might mean on the ground in Hawaii, our home turf.
In a client alert we did: Hawaii’s property owners now
New Article: Restatement (SCOTUS) of Property – What Happened to Use in Murr v. Wisconsin?
Here’s the article, recently published in the UMKC Law Review with thoughts on Murr v. Wisconsin, the case about the “denominator” issue in regulatory takings cases.
We won’t get into it in detail (if you are interested, you can read the article yourself), except to say that therein we offer views of what
Knick Analysis, Part I: After More Than 30 Years, Supreme Court Reopens The Federal Courthouse Door To Property Owners
Yes, this is detail from the Supreme Court’s front door.
This is the first in what will be a short series of five posts with thoughts on the landmark decision in Knick. In this installment, a crash course in the extensive doctrinal background necessary to understand why the Knick Court did what it did. Here
Knick Analysis, Part II: The Court Finds A Vehicle In A Zombie-Zoning Case
This is the second in a series of five posts taking a look at last week’s landmark ruling by a sharply-divided Supreme Court, Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647 (June 21, 2019). Here are the related posts:
Knick Analysis, Part III: What It Means To “Take” Property Without Just Compensation – “A bank robber might give the loot back, but he still robbed the bank.”
This is the third in a series of five posts taking a look at last week’s landmark ruling by a sharply-divided Supreme Court, Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647 (June 21, 2019). Here are the related posts: