Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following, a tale from New York that reminds us of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419 (1982). Every takings lawyer worth his or her salt knows that Loretto stands for the proposition that a regulation allowing a
Trickle-Down Regulation: Environmental Maze Becomes “Stumbling Block” For The Little Guys
There’s a feature story in today’s Honolulu Star-Advertiser, “Red tape ties up groups’ fishpond restorations,” about a local caretaker group’s frustration with “government rules” they claim are thwarting their efforts to fix up a traditional littoral fishpond.
For those of you not familiar with these centuries-old aquacultural structures designed to catch
State’s BIO In New York Rent Control Case
Here’s the state’s BIO in Harmon v. Kimmel, No. 11-496 (cert. filed Oct. 17, 2011), the case challenging New York City’s rent control ordinance as a due process violation and as a taking. We posted the cert petition and the three amicus briefs in support here.
Both respondents waived their rights to file
BIO In New York Rent Control Case: Market Rents Are “Unjust, Unreasonable, And Oppressive”
Here’s the BIO in Harmon v. Kimmel, No. 11-496 (cert. filed Oct. 17, 2011), the case challenging New York City’s rent control ordinance as a due process violation and as a taking. Although the respondents waived their right to respond, the Court requested they file an opposition.
We posted the cert petition and the
Amicus Brief In Willets Point Case: Condemnation For Redevelopment Needs A Plan
After the New York Court of Appeals’ decisions in the Goldstein (Atlantic Yards) and Kaur (Columbia) cases, we opined that there were not many limits remaining on the government’s exercise of eminent domain in that state.
But even after those cases, there’s got to be some limits, no?
Our Owners’ Counsel of America colleague Michael
Smoke Em If You Got Em – Cal Ct App: Med Marijuana Dispensary Is Not A Per Se Nuisance
The appellate courts in California haven’t been too friendly to the medical marijuana dispensaries when it comes to land use and zoning. See here, here for example (the latter case is being considered by the California Supreme Court, so we may see some major pronouncement this year).
Here’s the latest decision, City of Lake
Connecticut: Zoning Officials Need Probable Cause To Search Private Property
In Town of Bozrah v. Chmurynski, No. SC 18424 (Feb. 14, 2012), the Connecticut Supreme Court held that in order for the town’s zoning enforcement officer to inspect private property, he must obtain an injunction (similar to a warrant in the criminal context) that is based on probable cause:
In conclusion, we hold that
Movie Review: “The Descendants”
Matthew King, the Honolulu lawyer at the center of Alexander Payne’s The Descendants, has two problems, one of which I will never have, and one of which, God willing, I hope never to have.
The first is his status as the sole trustee of an alii trust in possession of 25,000 acres of prime
Texas: “The requirement of compensation may make the regulatory scheme more expensive, but it does not affect the regulations themselves or their goals for groundwater production.”
This just arrived: in Edwards Aquifer Auth. v. Day, No. 08-0964 (Feb. 24, 2012), the Texas Supreme Court, applying the Penn Central test, held that the government is not entitled to summary judgment because “the three Penn Central factors do not support summary judgment for the Authority and the State. A full development of
Book Review: Callies, Regulating Paradise (2d ed. 2010)
Professor Patricia E. Salkin (of the Law of the Land blog) has written this review of Professor David Callies’ Regulating Paradise: Land Use Controls in Hawaii (2d ed. 2010). The review is in the latest edition of the Urban Lawyer (43 Urb. Lawyer 1107 (2011)), the law review published by the ABA’s Section of