A quick one from the Arizona Supreme Court that isn’t so much a true takings case, but more like “takings adjacent.” In our view, it well illustrates the way that takings arguments can shape how statutes are interpreted, even if there isn’t a taking.
The case — Cao v. PFP Dorsey Investments, LLC, No.
Here’s what we’re reading today:
Under many (most?) state eminent domain schemes, if a property owner withdraws the condemnor’s deposit prior to the judgment of condemnation, the owner waives — or, more technically, forfeits — the ability to challenge public use and necessity.
Vermont is no different, and under its statute, waiver is triggered by the owner’s “acceptance and
The New York Supreme Court Appellate Division’s opinion in HBC Victor LLC v. Town of Victor, No. 23-01347 (Mar. 22, 2024) marks the second time the issue of whether the Town can seize HBC’s property by eminent domain.
The first time out the court shot down the taking, concluding that it lacked a valid
In Brinkmann v. Town of Southold, No. 22-2722 (Mar. 13, 2024), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressed a longstanding issue left unresolved by the Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005): is it enough that a condemnor’s professed use qualifies as a public
When it comes to the longstanding ALI-CLE American Law Institute-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conferences, we’re always ready to go. You know that. But this year’s version — the 41st — was buzzing like no other in recent memory.
Maybe it was the New Orleans venue with its atmo, food, and music for
The historic Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Here’s the latest in a somewhat strange case we’ve been following about what happens after a court determines that a taking lacks a public use — but the condemnor goes ahead and just seizes the property anyway.
The Town of Apex, North Carolina, sought to take an easement
Don’t miss out!
We promise: this is the last time we’re going to try to entice you to the upcoming ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference in New Orleans. We are getting close to capacity, but there is still room. In recent years, we have standing room only in the Conference halls, and
Here are the cases that Michael Berger and I discussed in today’s presentation to the ABA State and Local Government Law Section’s Land Use group. It was good seeing everyone, even virtually:
Here it is — Professor Gideon Kanner’s final law journal article, published shortly before his passing:
Gideon Kanner, Eminent Domain Projects That Didn’t Work Out, 12 Brigham-Kanner Prop. Rts. J. 171 (2023).
Appropriately, we think, published in William and Mary Law School’s Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Journal, named in part in Gideon’s honor.