Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following.
In this Order, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii made permanent its earlier ruling that Honolulu’s ordinance which expanded the minimum rental term to 90 days because it did not account for those owners who were already legally renting their properties
Starting in January, we’ll be helping our friend and former law partner Mark M. Murakami with the venerated and oh-so-important Land Use course (Law 580) at the University of Hawaii’s Law School.
We’re temporarily stepping into some mighty big slippers (this is Hawaii, so we don’t always wear shoes), as this is the course that
You remember that longstanding trope: that matters of land use are “local” issues, and thus in civil rights claims involving a state or local government interfering with the right of property federal courts should avoid adjudication until the government has had every chance to do the right thing (even where it is patently obvious that
Here it is — Professor Gideon Kanner’s final law journal article, published shortly before his passing:
Gideon Kanner, Eminent Domain Projects That Didn’t Work Out, 12 Brigham-Kanner Prop. Rts. J. 171 (2023).
Appropriately, we think, published in William and Mary Law School’s Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Journal, named in part in Gideon’s honor.
22nd annual Alfred B. DelBello Land Use
and Sustainable Development Conference
Come, join us (and others) on Thursday-Friday, December 7-8, 2023, at Pace Law School in White Plains, New York for the Land Use and Sustainable Development Conference (this year’s conference theme is “Balancing Economic Realities with Environmental and Social Concerns”).
We’re speaking about the
Check this one out, the Harvard Law Review‘s summary of Tyler v. Hennepin County, the “home equity theft” takings case decided unanimously by the Supreme Court.
Some highlights:
Beginning with traditional principles, Chief Justice Roberts suggested that a property interest in surplus equity had English origins — King John proclaimed in the Magna
On this day in 1926, the United States Supreme Court issued its landmark opinion in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (Nov. 22, 1926).
You know this one (shame on you if you don’t!) – it is the case in which the Supreme Court first upheld — against
“No need to ask, he’s a smooth operator…”
Here’s the amicus brief we just filed in a case we’ve (obviously) been paying close attention to.
This is Devillier v. Texas, the case in which the Supreme Court is considering what does the it mean when it describes the Just Compensation Clause as “self-executing?”
Check this out, our law firm colleague Joshua Thompson talks about regulatory takings, and his big Supreme Court victory in Cedar Point Nursery.
If you are reading this blog, you already know what that means. Regulatory takings. Bundle of sticks. Penn Central (bleh), and right to exclude. Here’s the description of the program:
In
Here’s the merits brief in a case we’ve been following (naturally, because it is one of ours). This is Sheetz v. El Dorado County, the case which asks whether a condition on development (aka an “exaction”) is exempt from the close nexus and rough proportionality standards of Nollan/Dolan/Koontz simply because the exaction is imposed