We don’t normally post trial court decisions, particularly ones which simply dismiss a case. But the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania’s recent memorandum order in The Property Management Group, Ltd. v. City of Philadelphia, No. 17-1260 (May 23, 2017), which deals in part with a somewhat unusual takings claim, is
Seattle Eminent Domain Conference, May 18, 2017
Do you really need an excuse to visit Seattle? If you do, and want to earn some CLE credit while you’re at it, check it out the brochure for the upcoming Eminent Domain seminar on May 18, 2017. This is a one-day program that focuses on the hot topics in our area of law. We’ll
Murr Oral Argument Recording
Here’s the recording of the March 20, 2017 oral arguments in Murr v. Wisconsin, the e “larger parcel” or “denominator” case.
The printed transcript is posted here, and our summary of the arguments is posted here. Our preview of the arguments, which includes link to the briefs, is here.
Fed Cir: BLM’s Temporary Prohibition On Mining Not A Penn Central Taking
There’s a lot of backstory in Reoforce, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-5084 (Mar. 17, 2017), involving mining claims, federal patents, and public lands. An interesting read, we won’t go into the details.
But suffice it to say that Reoforce thought it had a pretty decent chance of obtaining a patent for federal land
Friday Round-Up: Murr Arguments, Exactions Cert Petition, Houston “Zoning”
Here’s what we’re reading this Friday:
- Here’s a more complete analysis of the recently-filed cert petition on whether legislatively-mandated permit conditions are exactions subject to Nollan/Dolan. From our colleague Bryan Wenter, former City Attorney for Walnut Creek, California. at Miller Starr Regalia’s land use blog.
- Professor Kanner on the Murr oral arguments. Our summary
Affirmed By An Equally Confused Court? Some Thoughts On The Oral Arguments In The “Larger Parcel” Case
No, this isn’t the Supreme Court, it’s Graceland,
purchased by Elvis in March 1957.
(We’re just checking whether you are paying attention.)
Appellate oral argument, as they say, is supposed to be a “conversation” between the bench and counsel. But the overall impression we were left with after reviewing the transcript of yesterday’s Supreme Court
Murr v. Wisconsin (Larger Parcel In Reg Takings) OA Transcript
For those of you, like us, who were not able to be in DC for today’s oral arguments in the “larger parcel” or “denominator” case, Murr v. Wisconsin (see our preview of the arguments here), here’s the transcript, hot off the press.
SCOTUS Argument Preview: Does Fee Simple Absolute Mean Anything? The “Larger Parcel” Issue In Regulatory Takings
As takings mavens are no doubt already aware, next Monday, the 8-Justice Supreme Court will hear arguments in Murr v. Wisconsin, the regulatory takings case which asks whether the county can avoid application of the Lucas wipeout standard on one parcel by taking advantage of the fact that the plaintiffs also own the
New Article: Recent Developments In Eminent Domain
Here’s an article, recently published by the Urban Lawyer (the law review produced by our ABA section, the Section of State and Local Government Law), with our take on the most interesting and important eminent domain and takings rulings from the past year.
Many of the cases discussed will be familiar to regular
2017 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain Conference Wrap, 2018 Venue Announcement
When we previewed the 2017 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference while we were getting buried in the snow a couple of weeks ago, we promised there would be better weather in San Diego than much of the country was then experiencing. As you can see, we delivered.
We — and by