Word comes that the California Supreme Court has denied review of the Court of Appeal decision in Lockaway Storage v. County of Alameda, No. A30874 (1st Dist. May 9, 2013). The court also rejected a request to “depublish” the First District’s opinion. Congratulations are again in order for colleague Tim Kassouni, who represents
Materials From Today’s Eminent Domain In Hawaii Conference
Here are links to the cases and other materials (and more) we spoke about at today’s conference on Eminent Domain and Condemnation in Hawaii:
- Ilagan v. Ungacta (Guam v. 162.40 Square Meters of Land)
- Ilya Somin, The Judicial Reaction to Kelo, 4 Alb. Gov’t L. Rev. 1 (2011)
- Ilya Somin, The
Telebriefing: Regulatory Takings Claims In California
Please join us this upcoming Monday, August 19, 2013 from 1:00 – 2:30 p.m. Pacific Time for a telebriefing, “Regulatory Takings Claims in California – Implications of Recent Decisions and Advice for Practitioners and Government Agencies.”
Brad Kuhn (Nossaman, California Eminent Domain Report) is the program Chair and will serve as moderator
Guest Post: More On The Two Federal Lawsuits Challenging The Underwater Mortgage Taking Scheme
Here is a deeper look at the two lawsuits filed lastweek in U.S. District Court in San Francisco against the City ofRichmond, California, for the city’s Mortgage Resolution Partners-backed plan to condemn underwater mortgages, specifically those held by out-of-state securitizedbonds, residential mortgage-backed securitization (RMBS) trusts. The first Complaint was brought by Wells Fargo and a
Cal App: Nollan/Dolan Issues Impacting Eminent Domain Valuation Are Decided By The Jury
Update: More thoughts from Rick Rayl and Brad Kuhn (California Eminent Domain Report) here.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here’s a decision at the intersection of eminent domain valuation and unconstitutional exactions from the California Court of Appeal (Fourth District). In City of Perris v. Stamper, No. E053395 (Aug. 9, 2013) the court held that
6th Cir: Takings Plaintiff Forfeited Argument That Facial Challenges Not Subject To Williamson County’s State Procedures Requirement
Whoa, that was fast: in a case argued on August 2, 2013, and decided on August 9, 2013 (that’s one week from orals to opinion, folks), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Village of Maineville v. Salt Run, LLC, No. 12-4379 (Aug. 9, 2013), held that the property owner/plaintiff forfeited*
Wednesday Round-Up: Koontz Recording, Jersey Shore Dunes, Plastic Bag Bans
Here’s what we’re reading today:
- Here’s the recording of the recent webinar on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgm’t Dist., No. 11-1447 (June 25, 2013), featuring Paul Beard II, arguing and prevailing counsel. Go here, sign in, and listen for free.
- Our Owners’ Counsel colleague from
First Post-Koontz Case: City’s “Inclusionary Housing” Exaction Challenged In California Supreme Court
Remember that decision by the California Court of Appeal which held that the City of San Jose’s “inclusionary housing” exaction was subject only to low-level scrutiny and not the nexus-and-proportionality requirment?
Well, after Koontz, you should not be surprised that the decision has been taken to the next higher level and the California Building
Today’s Free Webinar – Mitigation Options Affected by the Supreme Court in 2013: Koontz and Other Game Changers
This really was a “blockbuster” Term for the Supreme Court and takings law: no less than three cases (and four, maybe five, if you expand it slightly to include property-owner favorable cases such as Lozman and last term’s Sackett), and as Gideon Kanner noted recently, the CLE sessions are flying fast and furiously.
Upcoming Live Chat: Koontz – How Far Has Nollan/Dolan Been Extended
Here’s one not to miss, not only because it’s free, but because it features our PLF colleague Paul Beard II, arguing and prevailing counsel in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgm’t Dist., No. 11-1447 (June 25, 2013): on Wednesday, July 17, 2013, from 2:00 – 3:30 pm ET, Greenberg Traurig and