Given the title of this blog and our usual inclinations in takings cases, you would be forgiven for assuming that we’d have a negative review of the Second Circuit’s opinion in 1256 Hurtel Avenue Associates, LLC v. Bulan, No. 12-1603-bk (Aug. 1, 2014), which held that a legislative increase in the size of the
Cal Supreme Court To Review Eminent Domain Entry Statutes – A Free Pass, Or A Taking?
Update: Here’s a story on the case from the Sacramento Bee (“State Supreme Court to rule in Delta property-rights case“). See also “Property Reserve on Hold: Supreme Court to Review Eminent Domain Right of Entry Statutes” from Brad Kuhn at the California Eminent Domain Law Report.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thanks to our
Fla App: Because A Golf Course That Eventually Went Broke (And Was Later Bought By The City) Was “Profitable,” City Not Liable For A Taking
Our thanks to Jacob Cremer for the heads-up on the Florida Court of Appeals’ decision in Ocean Palm Golf Club Partnership v. City of Flagler Beach, No. 5D12-4274 (May 30, 2014). Jacob did not post any analysis (undertstandable because his law firm is involved in the case) so we’ll add our two cents.
Atlantic Yards: How About Calling It The “Jay Z” Medal?
You remember Battle for Brooklyn, the documentary which chronicles the eminent domain fight over New York’s Atlantic Yards project? (Read our review of the film here to refresh your recollection.)
Well here’s the latest chapter. Or perhaps “epilogue” is more appropriate, because the former property owners have long since been evicted, the homes have
Fed Cir: Big Auto Bailout Could Be A Taking
Here’s the latest from the Federal Circuit, a decision involving regulatory takings, the big auto bailout, and the nature of property rights. A&D Auto Sales, Inc. v. United States, Nos. 13-5019, 13-1520 (Apr. 7, 2014)
In the TARP and the related bankruptcy cases, the federal government bailed out the two big American auto manufacturers
CFC: Denial Of Wetlands Dredge And Fill § 404 Permit = Taking = $4.2M Just Compensation
Remember the Lost Tree case? That’s the one where the Federal Circuit concluded that a single parcel owned by the plaintiff was the relevant parcel against which the impact of the Corps of Engineers’ denial of a § 404 wetlands dredge and fill permit is to be measured. The court overturned a Court of Federal
Cal App States The Inconvenient Truth: There’s No Substitute For Eminent Domain – Gov’t Must Condemn First If It Wants To Enter Land
This is a longer post, but we think it’s worthy of your time. That’s because even though there’s a lot going on in the opinion by the California Court of Appeal in Property Reserve, Inc. v. Superior Court, No. C067758 (Mar. 13, 2014), it cuts through much of the unnecessary doctrinal fog surrounding takings
31st Annual ALI-CLE Eminent Domain And Land Valuation Litigation (New Orleans)
Next week, we’ll be in New Orleans for the 2014 edition of the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain program, now in its 31st year.
As usual, my Owners’ Counsel colleagues Leslie Fields and Joe Waldo (the programming co-chairs) have put together a fantastic 2.5 day of programming, taught by expert faculty. At 11:00 a.m. on
New Article: Recent Developments in Regulatory Takings
The Urban Lawyer, the law review produced by the ABA Section of State & Local Goverment Law has published my article Recent Developments in Regulatory Takings, 45 Urban Lawyer 769 (2013).
Here’s the Introduction to the article:
THE SUPREME COURT’S 2012 TERM promised to be a banner year in regulatory takings law, with
Govt’s BIO In Mehaffy: Preexisting Regulations Wipe Out Penn Central’s Reasonable Expectations
Here’s the government’s Brief in Opposition in Mehaffy v. United States, No. 12-1416 (cert. petition filed June 3, 2013.
In that case, the Federal Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, held that Mehaffy failed the Penn Central ad hoc takings test solely because he purchased the property alleged to have been taken after the