In this order, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois temporarily enjoined enforcement of Chicago suburb Glen Ellyn‘s prohibition on renting property for less than 30 days.
Blakelick owns a five-bedroom single family home that when purchased was not located in Glen Ellyn. Since 2022, it has been offering the
In Brady v. City of Myrtle Beach, No. 23-1847 (May 16, 2025), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit made short work of the takings claims brought by several business owners who claimed the city directly or indirectly shut them down because their businesses contributed to a rise in crime in the
Florida, like a lot of other jurisdictions, has an unclaimed property program whereby if an owner is deemed to have abandoned property (remember that old bank account you had in college years ago with a $2.50 balance?), the holder of that property may transfer it to the State, which keeps it until you come get
It was on this day in 1928 when the U.S. Supreme Court issued its second most famous decision about zoning, Nectow v. City of Cambridge., 277 U.S. 183 (1928).
We say “second” because everyone knows that the first is the Court’s decision issued just two years earlier which generally upheld comprehensive use, height, and
We’ve had this one in our queue for a bit, but it seems now is a good time to lay out the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in McIntosh v. Madisonville, No. 24-5383 (Jan. 21, 2025). After all, the Due Process Clause seems to be in the news a lot
The key quote from the Illinois Appellate Court’s recent opinion in Robinson v. City of Chicago, No. 1-23-2174 (Mar. 24, 2025), in which a property owner challenged the inclusion of his property in a new Chicago historic preservation district? This seemingly innocuous sentence setting out the standard of review:
The plaintiff acknowledges that his
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following closely (and disclosure: our firm filed an amicus brief in the Texas Supreme Court).
First, the bottom line: in The Commons at Lake Houston, Ltd. v. City of Houston, No. 23-0474 (Mar. 21, 2025), the Texas Supreme Court held that merely because a regulation
Wondering what happened to that case we posted about last week, where our outfit is representing property owners in a federal court challenge to a Rhode Island town’s efforts to take their land by eminent domain?
Well, here’s the latest. The court just issued this Temporary Restraining Order. Read it for the details.
Today we have a guest post by New York colleague Jennifer Polovetsky, who writes about an exactions case that is headed for the New York Court of Appeals. Disclosure: our firm represents the property owners in that court.
Thanks to Jennifer (and to the New York Law Journal) for allowing us to republish her
Before we go further, a disclosure: this is one of ours.
Here’s the Complaint for Violations of Constitutional and Civil Rights, filed yesterday by the Santoro Family in federal court in Rhode Island. This lawsuit challenges, under the Public Use Clause, a RI town’s eminent domaining the family’s land for the ostensible purpose
