Here’s a case that reveals exactly what is wrong with the Supreme Court’s ripeness doctrine in Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172 (1985). As we noted in this post, it’s “a seemingly endless procedural game where property owners are forced to keep guessing which shell the pea is
New Article On Legislative-Adjudicative Distinction In Nollan/Dolan Analysis
Heads up on a new article of interest to those of us who deal with exactions and Nollan/Dolan: Matthew Baker, Much Ado About Nollan/Dolan: The Comparative Nature of the Legislative Adjudication Distinctions in Exactions, 42 Urban Lawyer 171 (2010). Here’s a summary:
Much has been made, by both commentators and
Curb Appeal In South Dakota: No Special Benefit To Property Means That Special Assessment Is A Taking
A rule of law set out over 100 years ago and which remains (as we say) good law qualifies as “well-established” by any standard. Village of Norwood v. Baker, 172 U.S. 269 (1898) set forth the rule that a special assessment for municipal improvements is only constitutional if the improvements result in the property
Permit Condition Requiring “Active” Farming Struck Down Under Nollan/Dolan
We rarely post developments from trial courts, but every now and then a trial court order is so interesting that we deviate from our usual rule. Here’s one that’s worth sharing.
In Sterling v. California Coastal Comm’n, No. CIV. 482448 (Cal. Super. June 18, 2010), the San Mateo County Superior Court (the county immediately
A Regulatory Takings Glossary (or, How to Translate Property Rights Lawyerspeak)
The WMA Reporter, the monthly publication of the Western Manufactured Communities Housing Association has published A Regulatory Takings Glossary (or, How to Translate Property Rights Lawyerspeak), my short article that attempts to deconstruct some of the more common terms property lawyers toss about. Here’s the Introduction:
One of my law school professors once
Impact Fee Not Reasonably Related To Burden Created By Development
Most of the time when we think of impact fees and other development exactions, Nollan and Dolan spring immediately to mind. In those two cases, the Court established the requirement that exactions have a reasonable relationship (“nexus”) to some ill caused by a proposed development, and be “roughly proportional” to the impact created by the
New Opinions: Inverse Condemnation Statute Of Limitations, Impact Fee Nexus
Here are two opinions just received that look awfully interesting, but that we haven’t had a chance to read in detail:
- Homebuilders Ass’n Tulare/Kings Counties, Inc. v. City of Lemoore, No. F057671 (Cal. Ct. App. June 9, 2010) – invalidating a fire protection impact fee under California’s Mitigation Fee Act because “it is not
California Court Of Appeal: Takings Claims Brought Too Early, Too Late, And No Damages For Violations Of The Right To Petition (Inter Alia)
The latest skirmish in California’s mobile home rent control wars, this time from the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, in two cases out of San Diego county, MHC Financing Ltd. P’ship v. City of Santee, No. D053345 (Mar. 15, 2010).
The cases present a convoluted series of facts and procedural twists which we
ALI-ABA Annual Eminent Domain Conference Wrap-Up
We just wrapped up the annual three-day Festival of Eminent Domain Law, otherwise known as the American Law Institute | American Bar Association’s two CLE conferences, “Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation,”and “Condemnation 101: How To Prepare and Present an Eminent DomainCase.”
Dana Berliner, Matt Fellerhoff and I spoke about about “Winning Arguments in
Getting The “Goodies” And Honolulu’s $100 Million Golf Course Exaction
On Wednesday, Honolulu lost its iconic former Mayor, Frank Fasi. Mayor Fasi will be remembered for a lot of things, but we here at inversecondemnation.com will fondly recall his cheek when it came to exactions and in lieu payments. Two of the more well known examples:
- During the second wave of investment in Hawaii