Thanks to lawprof Donald Kochan for the heads-up: the “Word of the Day” in today’s New York Times is … “eminent domain.”
Defined by the piece as:
“the right of the state to take private property for public use; the Fifth Amendment that was added to the Constitution of the United States requires that just
98 years old, and still going (for better or worse)
On this day in 1926, the United States Supreme Court issued its landmark opinion in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (Nov. 22, 1926).
You know this one (and can you call yourself a dirt lawyer if you don’t?
Get ready to join your colleagues and friends in San Diego for the 42d ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference.
The 41st Conference was in New Orleans. Here’s a report of that event, and here are our reports from prior conferences in Austin and Scottsdale.
Here are some of the
We’re not going to pretend to fully understand the Supreme Court of India’s recent decision in Property Owners Ass’n v. State of Maharashtra, No. 2012-2022 (Nov. 4, 2024) for obvious reasons (plus, the judgement and various opinions and dissents total 193 pages).
But we post it here because we think it gives some insight
Here are the cases and other materials we discussed in today’s Section of State & Local Government Law Land Use group meeting on takings:
Today’s must-read, a (very) recent article by our Pacific Legal Foundation colleague John Groen, published in the Touro Law Review, “Takings, Original Meaning, and Applying Property Law Principles to Fix Penn Central.”
With a title like that, who could resist? Here’s the Abstract:
Justice Clarence Thomas, dissenting
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following. The New Jersey Supreme Court has agreed to review the Appellate Division’s decision in Englewood Hospital & Medical Center v. New Jersey.
That’s the case where several hospitals challenged a New Jersey statute which requires hospitals to take all patients regardless of their ability
Mr. Otis would be a P’Nut fan.
Our Pacific Legal Foundation colleague and search-and-seizure expert Daniel Woislaw quickly responded to the cultural zeitgeist and looked into l‘affaire P’nut le Squirrel with his keen legal eye.
That’s the case in which an internet narc dropped dime on the owner of a pet squirrel, resulting in
Charles McFarland, arguing.
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following closely (and disclosure: our firm filed an amicus brief in the Texas Supreme Court).
In The Commons of Lake Houston, Ltd. v. City of Houston, the Texas Court of Appeals held that the city could not be liable for a taking
The latest issue of the University of Chicago Law Review has this student-authored piece that is worth your time reading. “Guns and the Right to Exclude: Saving Guns-at-Work Laws from Cedar Point‘s Per Se Takings Rule,” 91 U. Chi. L. Rev. 2047 (2024).
Here’s the Abstract:
The Supreme Court’s decision in Cedar