This is one of ours — argued by our Pacific Legal Foundation colleague Kady Valois — so we won’t be offering any commentary.
But we just have to post the U.S. Court of Appeals’ opinion in Iten v. County of Los Angeles, No. 22-55480 (Aug. 30, 2023), because it discusses two significant issues, and
Early registration is a good thing because space is limited, especially at the Wren Building banquet on the 26th, at which the 2023 B-K Property Rights
The two-plus years under the declared Co-19 emergency surely have given Hawaii’s executive-branch officials a clear vision of how much easier they could get their agendas accomplished without all that pesky democracy.
Hawaii’s Sweeping Emergency Management Act: Governor is the “Sole Judge”
Hawaii’s Emergency Management Act gives state and county executives broad and nearly unreviewable
Worth checking out: a new article from Pepperdine Law School’s Shelley Ross Saxer, published in the University of Hawaii Law Review, “Necessity Exceptions to Takings,” 44 U. Haw. L. Rev. 60 (2022). [Disclosure: as noted in the author’s note, we reviewed an earlier draft of the piece and provided some thoughts.]
A big thanks to friend and colleague Paul Henry for bringing to our attention this article by Andrew Stuttaford, UFOs and Eminent Domain.
No, it (unfortunately) is not the latest tenure-making scholarly law journal article (but we can dream, can’t we?), but a piece in National Review.
It details a proposal to release
A short one from the Florida District Court of Appeals (First District).
In D’Arcy v. Florida Gaming Control Comm’n, No. 1D21-3606 (May 24, 2023), the court held that the voters of Florida adopted Amendment 13 to the Florida Constitution that outlawed betting on greyhound racing (indeed betting all dog racing), it did not effect
The voters of South Lake Tahoe, California, adopted an ordinance that forbade the city from issuing short-term rental permits for properties in residential zones unless the owner was a permanent resident of the city, and declared that all short-term rental permits would expire three years later. The trial court granted the city summary judgment on
Here’s the latest in an issue we’ve been following.
Let’s say the government thinks you have committed a crime (or someone else has). To investigate, it seizes property as evidence or potential evidence. But after things wrap up and it no longer needs the property as evidence, the government doesn’t return it to its owner.
We’re not going to dwell all that much on the California Court of Appeal’s recent opinion in Discovery Builders, Inc. v. City of Oakland, No. A164315 (June 22, 2023), mostly because it seems entirely predictable.
The developer thought it had an agreement with the city to pay certain fees (dare we say “exactions”) the
In this very short (but apparently published) opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals held that it was not right to dismiss a claim on the pleadings and that factual development is warranted, even where the complaint alleges that a municipal land use ordinance is arbitrary and capricious, and the city claims it has a