The California Coastal Commission has filed its Brief in Opposition to the cert petition in Charles A. Pratt Const. Co. v. California Coastal Comm’n, No. 08-668 (cert. petition filed Nov. 18, 2008) (SCOTUS docket report here). The California Court of Appeal’s opinion, reported at 76 Cal. Rptr. 2d 466 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) is
Penn Central
More Amici Supporting Grant of Cert in Pratt (Penn Central and Williamson County)
There have now been a total of five briefs amicus curiae filed supporting the petition for writ of certiorari in Charles A. Pratt Construction Co. v. California Coastal Commission, No. 08-668 (cert. petition filed Nov. 18, 2008) (SCOTUS docket report here).
We wrote here about the California Court of Appeal’s decision, reported at 76…
Further Amici Supporting Grant of Cert in Pratt (Penn Central and Williamson County)
Here is the brief amici curiae of the National Association of Home Builders, California Building Industry Association, Building Industry Association Legal Defense Foundation, and Home Builders Association of Northern California urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Charles A. Pratt Const. Co. v. California Coastal Comm’n, 76…
Our Amicus Brief in Pratt Construction Co. v. California Coastal Commission
Today, on behalf of the Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association, we (me and my Damon Key colleagues Christi-Anne Kudo Chock and Matt Evans) filed an amicus brief brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to accept for review the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Charles A. Pratt Const. Co. v. California Coastal Comm’n…
Cal. Court of Appeals: Extension of Ordinance Allows New Inverse Condemnation Challenge
When must a landowner challenge a land use regulation she claims illegally impact her property? Talk to a lawyer, and they’re usually going to say that you should act sooner than later, and often the time limitations are very short. Under California law, for example, facial challenges to a zoning ordinance must be brought within…
9th Circuit: Revised Opinion in McClung v. City of Sumner
A panel of the Ninth Circuit has revised its earlier opinion in McClung v. City of Sumner, No. 07-35231 (Sep. 25, 2008), adding a footnote:
On slip Opinion page 13750, insert a new footnote 3 at the bottom of the page after the sentence that ends “. . . applies to Ordinance 1603.” (and…
New Cert Petition on Penn Central and (Yet Again) Williamson County
When four justices of the U.S. Supreme Court tell you that a case needs to be overruled, and district judges acknowledge the case “has led to a number of serious problems,” you know something is seriously wrong. Yes, we’re back to Williamson County.
Key Player in Penn Central Case Obit
The New York Times posts the obituary of Dorothy Miner, a key player in the case that resulted in Penn Central Trans. Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978),the U.S. Supreme Court case that gave us the three-part “ad hoc” regulatory takings test:
She played an important role in the…
Links From UH Historic Preservation Workshop
To those who attended the workshop at the University of Hawaii law school, Hawaii State Historic Preservation Laws: Reclaiming the Past, Shaping the Future, thank you. Here are links to the cases I mentioned in my presentation.
- Penn Central Trans. Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978),a case that highlights
…
Ninth Circuit: Legislative Exactions Not Subject to Nollan/Dolan
“This case presents an issue of first impression in this Circuit — whether a legislative, generally applicable development condition that does not require the owner to relinquish rights in the real property, as opposed to an adjudicative land-use exaction, should be reviewed pursuant to the ad hoc standards of Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City…
