A frequent vibe in cases where a member of the public asks a court to compel a local government to do something about an undesired land use (i.e., “the city should stop my neighbor from illegally renting their property,” or “the police should remove the pop-up unlicensed food stand on the sidewalk in
Michigan, Over Dissent, Declines To Hear Co-19 Shutdown Takings Case
In this Order, the Michigan Supreme Court declined to consider a case which challenges the Michigan governor’s Co-19 shutdown executive orders, which, in the words of the dissenting Justices, reached “nearly every aspect of life in our state.”
There have been a lot of cases asserting that Co-19 shutdowns are takings, with most (
S Dakota: Only Way To Read Precondemnation Entry Statute Constitutionally Is Allowing “minimally invasive superficial inspections” and “minor soil disturbances”
This would not be authorized.
Here’s the latest in an issue that found new vitality after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Cedar Point affirming that government-authorized physical entry to private property is presumptively a taking.
This is the “precondemnation entry” issue in eminent domain which several courts have addressed:
Back To School For Dirt Law @ William & Mary, Season VII
Yes, the mysterious ducks remain — and seem to have multiplied.
It’s that time of the year again. Fall’s-a-coming, and that means that starting today, we’re back at the William and Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Virginia to lead two courses:
- Eminent Domain and Property Rights (W&M is one of the few law schools
Book Launch Event, Aug 13, 2024: Jim Burling, “Nowhere to Live: The Hidden Story of America’s Housing Crisis”
If you are in the California Southland (or plan to be in the next week), please be sure to reserve on your calendar Tuesday, August 13, 2024, to join us in-person for the launch of our colleague Jim Burling‘s forthcoming book, “Nowhere to Live: The Hidden Story of America’s Housing Crisis.”
Govt: We Were Really Really Really About To Pay…Until You Forced Us To Pay! Sewer Board Seeks Rehearing In Self-Executing Just Comp Case
Just a few posts ago, we put up the Louisiana Supreme Court’s opinion in a case where property owners obtained a final inverse condemnation judgment ordering the New Orleans Sewer Board to pay just compensation.
Then…crickets. The sewer board did not satisfy the judgment. It relied on a provision in the Louisiana Constitution
Blight Slight: No Taking Of Property For “The Proposed Project” When No Project Has Been Proposed
You all have likely seen ’em, those “We Buy Houses Any Condition” billboards letting the world know that no matter what condition it might be in, there’s an outfit that says it is willing to buy your house.
Well, that outfit ran into the one other outfit that is willing to buy your house
Federal Court In Removed Eminent Domain Case: Quick-Take/Immediate Possession Is Erie Procedural, So Does Not Apply
The site of the Erie incident, just a mile away from Mahon’s home.
Here’s an unusual, and kind of interesting one, from a U.S. District Court (Hawaii) in an eminent domain case brought by the County of Maui against the owner of Maui property which is needed for a solid waste disposal site
New Jersey: Forcing Hospital To Provide Care At A Loss Isn’t A Taking
We were all set to write up a scintillating and detailed analysis of the New Jersey Appellate Division’s opinion in Englewood Hospital & Med. Center v. New Jersey, No. A-2767-21 (June 27, 2024), when we thought, ah, why not just ask you to read our New Jersey colleague Joe Grather’s scintillating and detailed analysis.
Short story is right there in the title of this post. As Joe puts it:
In short, the hospitals argued that requiring them to provide charity care and Medicaid care at a loss was an unconstitutional taking of private property without just compensation. The trial court analyzed the claims as an “as-applied” challenge. Therefore, it dismissed some of the claims because of a failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The “slightly different reason” was that the Appellate Court found the claims were a facial challenge to the constitutionality of the statute, and therefore it analyzed the takings claims under the familiar rubric of whether there was a “direct government appropriation or physical invasion of private property,” or an “uncompensated regulatory interference with a property owner’s interest in their property.” Slip op. at 14.
No physical taking, no Penn Central taking. We recommend you read his entire post “As We Approach Our Nation’s Birthday, a New Jersey Appellate Court Rejects Hospitals’ Takings Claims.”
Joe ends it this way: “I bet the hospitals are preparing their petition for certification to the New Jersey Supreme Court now. Happy 4th of July!”
That means to stay tuned for more.
Englewood Hospital & Med. Center v. New Jersey, No. A-2767-21 (N.J. App. Div. June 27, 2024)
Continue Reading New Jersey: Forcing Hospital To Provide Care At A Loss Isn’t A Taking
New Article: “Original Understanding of ‘Background Principles’ in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid“
Worth reading: a student-authored piece in the latest issue of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, “Original Understanding of ‘Background Principles’ in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid.“
From the Introduction:
But in Cedar Point, when considering a regulation that authorized union organizers to enter certain businesses, the Court