Here’s your chance to spend some time with the author of one of the hottest land use and public policy books out there, Nolan Gray.
RSVP now (admission free, but space is limited) to join our Land Use class when we welcome Mr. Gray to respond to the question in the title of this post.
Today’s post is by our Pacific Legal Foundation colleague Kady Valois, writing about last week’s opinion by the Florida District Court of Appeal (Second District) in Lake Lincoln, LLC v. County of Manatee, No. 2D21-2826 (Jan. 13, 2023),
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Divide and Conquer (Or Not): Florida’s Test
For The Regulatory Takings Larger Parcel
by
We really want you there…
One (nearly) last reminder that there’s still time to register for your space at the 40th ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference, February 1-4, 2023, in Austin. In the past several years, we have sold out due to the conference room capacity and the conference hotel block.
Saturday in the park…I think it was the Fourth of July
Here’s the latest on a case we’ve been following, about the blocking off of a neighborhood in Seattle and making it a no-go zone for those whom the takeoverers wanted to keep out.
Yes, the CHOP/CHAZ case is still a thing. [And before we
Here at inversecondemnation.com, we were all set to call it a week and take a break from posting until Monday.
But SCOTUS had other ideas.
In this Order issued today, it agreed to review Tyler v. Hennepin County, No. 22-166, a case and an issue we’ve been following closely.
The Questions
We continue our series on the 100th anniversary of the mother lode of takings case, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (Dec. 11, 1922), with this short essay recently published in the “Notice & Comment” feature of the Yale Journal on Regulation.
You know the “amortization” doctrine: when an existing legal use is declared illegal, the government can avoid a takings claim by slowly phasing out the use, supposedly to allow the owner to recoup investment. The doctrine is established in Maryland by Grant v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 129 A.2d 363 (Md.
Here’s another one from the Ninth Circuit, argued on what one advocate called “land use day at the Ninth Circuit” (except, unlike the other two cases argued that day, the decision in this one gets published).
In Gearing v. City of Half Moon Bay, No. 21-16688 (Dec. 8, 2022), the panel upheld
This story might be said to have had its roots millions of years ago.
It is about coal, after all. Anthracite coal, to be exact.
But that — and today’s date — should give you a clue that, as we teased in this post a mere 28 days ago (the Supreme Court worked hard
Check out the Ohio Supreme Court’s 6-1 opinion in State ex rel. Ohio History Connection v. Moundbuilders Country Club Co., No. 2020-0191 (Dec. 7, 2022), in which the court held held that the taking of the Country Club’s lease for the property served a public use.
Court News Ohio beat us to the punch