Recently, we requested crowdsourcing of this year’s “come to the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain Conference video.” Instead of doing the video ourselves, we asked folks to “please send a short clip of you and/or your colleagues telling us why you think the Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference is the place to be
Get Ready – ALI-CLE Eminent Domain And Land Valuation Litigation Conference, Nashville Jan. 23-25, 2020
Details soon. In the meantime, get your earlier registration discount.
Cases And Links From Today’s Eminent Domain And Pipelines Conference (Houston)
I am grateful that planning chairs Justin Hodge and Jeremy Baker invited me to their conference. A room full of experts. Here are the links to the cases and other items I spoke about:
- Knick v. Township of Scott: initial thoughts on what might be a dawning “golden age” of property cases
- Knick, Entirely
Knick Already Taking Effect, Even Where It Isn’t Necessary
No sooner was the ink dry on the Supreme Court’s opinion in Knick v. Township of Scott, than the Court’s decision started to have some effect.
First, the Court granted another pending cert case on takings ripeness and sent back down to the Ninth Circuit for more in light of Knick.
And now this
Why Eminent Domain Lawyers Should Read The Supreme Court’s Census Case
Eminent domain lawyers know that even though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the property owner in Kelo, it acknowledged that there was a (slight?) hope in some cases where the condemnor’s stated public use or purposes is actually “pretext” to private benefit.
Pretext may be present in at least three situations: (1) when eminent
Colorado: A Lot Of Private Benefit Today Does Not Overcome Smattering Of Possible Public Future Benefit
The Colorado Supreme Court issued an opinion in a case we’ve been following on public use in eminent domain. in which it reframed the Questions Presented.
In Carousel Farms v. Woodcrest Homes, No. 2018SC30 (June 10, 2019), the court reversed the court of appeals’ conclusion that a taking lacked a public purpose because
We Are The World: Iowa SCT Finds Dakota Access Pipeline Will Promote The Public Convenience For Iowa, Even If Iowans Don’t Get Any Of The Pipeline’s Oil
Here’s one we’ve been waiting to drop for a while, on an issue we wrote about earlier this week.
In Puntenney v. Iowa Utilities Board, No. 17-0423 (May 31, 2019), the Iowa Supreme Court — taking a different view than Kentucky — held that a pipeline which runs through Iowa, but which
Are Pipelines For The Public’s Benefit? If So, What Public?
An issue we’ve been tracking for a while — are takings for pipelines for the public’s benefit? — raises another question: how is “the public” defined?
Some courts, like Kentucky’s, define the public as the public which the jurisdiction serves. In the Bluegrass Pipeline case, for
Ohio App: Owner Can’t Object To An Illegal Quick Take, Except By Filing A Trespass Action, And Obtaining An Injunction
In City of Dublin v. RiverPark Group, LLC, No. 18AP-607 (May 9, 2019), the Ohio Court of Appeals (Tenth District), the city exercised eminent domain — via Ohio’s version of “quick take” (immediate possession, not title) — to take an easement “for the purposes of constructing roadway improvements … and a shared-use path adjacent
Frozen: “Necessity” In Eminent Domain Can Mean Mere Convenience (Or Anything Else The Condemnor Says)
North Dakota, as you might expect, can be cold in the winter. So cold that railroad switches need to be heated, else they get… frozen. The railroad uses refillable propane tanks, but these need to be refilled from time to time. And North Dakota is so cold in the winter that sometimes, the propane trucks