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
CAFED: Just Because The Govt Seized Property As Evidence Doesn’t Mean It Can Keep It Without Compensation
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.
Chump Alert! Developer’s Claim That City Can Be Held To Its Contract Limiting Exactions Goes About As Well As You’d Expect
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
CA5 Makes Short Work Argument That Asserting A Rational Basis For A Short-Term Rental Ban Is Enough To Secure Pleadings Dismissal Of Arbitrary And Capricious Challenge
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
Texas Supreme Court: We Want To Resolve Whether Short-Term Renting Property A Natural Right, Just Not In This Case
In this order, the Texas Supreme Court declined to review a case we’ve been following, in which the court of appeals held that Grapevine’s total ban on short-term renting of property — banning even owners who had been doing so for a while — might be a taking. The court held that even
Join Us August 9, 2023: ALI-CLE’s “How Did Property Rights Fare at the Supreme Court? What Happened in the 2022 Term and What’s Next”
On Wednesday, August 9, 2023 at 1:00 – 2:00 p.m. (Eastern Time), please join us for ALI-CLE’s web program, “How Did Property Rights Fare at the Supreme Court? What Happened in the 2022 Term and What’s Next.”
Here’s the course description:
This has been a blockbuster U.S. Supreme Court term for property law
Iowa: City Of The Monks Keeping Part Of Your Tax Refund Isn’t A Taking, Red-Light Runners
In Livingood v. City of Des Moines, No. 22-0586 (June 9, 2023), the Iowa Supreme Court held that the city’s use of the Iowa’s process by which the government can satisfy all or part of a taxpayer’s debt to a public agency by grabbing someone’s tax refund. In a nutshell, after trying to collect
Tyler Takings Round-Up
Here are what others are saying about Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Tyler v. Hennepin County, No. 22-166 (U.S. May 25, 2023), the case in which the Court unanimously held that the county’s keeping the excess equity in Ms. Tyler’s home over what she owed in property taxes and fees is an uncompensated taking
Rethinking Penn Central: A Call For Symposium Papers
If you know, you know.
Pacific Legal Foundation (that’s us) has put out a call for papers about “Rethinking Penn Central.” Here’s the details (pdf).
Here’s some of the suggested topics:
- Can Penn Central be salvaged or does it need to be fully replaced?
- If it is to be replaced, what should
Unanimous SCOTUS: “state law cannot be the only source” Of Property Rights, And “traditional property law principles” As Enforced By The Takings Clause Play A Role
We’ll be rendering unto Caesar, but first we must
decide: classic or creamy?
That was quick: it seems like it was only yesterday — or maybe more accurately, less than a month ago — that we were listening in live to the Supreme Court as it heard arguments in Tyler v. Hennepin County, No.