A short one (per curiam is one two-sentence paragraph), with an interesting concurring opinions from the Florida District Court of Appeals (4th District).
In Vazquez v. City of Hallandale Beach, No. 4D2023-0833 (June 12, 2024), the court held that a restrictive covenant that ran with Vazquez’ land (and others in his subdivision, including the
Games people play
Night or day they’re just not matchin’
What they should do
Keeps me feelin’ blue
Been down too long
Right, wrong, I just can’t stop it
This one isn’t about takings, but is nonetheless a must-read.
In Health Freedom Defense Fund, Inc. v. Carvalho, No. 22-55908 (June 7, 2024), a panel
It was on this day in 1928 when the U.S. Supreme Court issued its second most famous decision about zoning, Nectow v. City of Cambridge., 277 U.S. 183 (1928).
We say “second” because everyone knows that the first is the Court’s decision issued just two years earlier which generally upheld comprehensive use, height, and
Check out the North Carolina Court of Appeals opinion in North Carolina Bar and Tavern Ass’n v. Cooper, No. COA22-725 (Apr. 16, 2024).
We’re not going to go into great detail, mostly because this one tracks the most common judicial approach to takings challenges to business shut-down orders during the Co-19 period. The court
There are some rewards for working late in the 808
Yesterday was the last day of instruction for the Spring 2024 semester at the University of Hawaii Law School. Did these last few months ever go by fast.
A big thank you to Professor Mark M. Murakami, with whom I guest-lectured at the Old
Be sure to join our Pacific Legal Foundation colleagues Brian Hodges and Larry Salzman, and Paul Beard (arguing counsel) and Chance Weldon (Texas Public Policy Foundation) tomorrow, Thursday, April 25, 2024, at 4pm ET for a free webinar on Sheetz v. El Dorado County, the Supreme Court’s recent decision holding that all permit conditions
Note: this is the second of our posts on the recent Supreme Court opinions in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the case in which the unanimous Court held that exactions imposed by legislation are not exempt from the essential nexus (Nollan) and rough proportionality (Dolan) standards. Here’s our first post
Guess where we stopped for coffee this morning?
(A reminder: this case has nothing to do
with the convenience store.)
Note: this is the first of two posts on the recent Supreme Court opinions in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the case in which the unanimous Court held that exactions imposed by
Here’s what folks are saying about yesterday’s unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, where the Court held that impact fees and exactions imposed by legislative action are not categorically immune from the close nexus and rough proportionality requirements already applicable to ad hoc/administratively-imposed exactions under Nollan, Dolan, and
When it comes to the longstanding ALI-CLE American Law Institute-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conferences, we’re always ready to go. You know that. But this year’s version — the 41st — was buzzing like no other in recent memory.
Maybe it was the New Orleans venue with its atmo, food, and music for
