Here’s the brochure and the full agenda and registration information for the upcoming ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference at the JW Marriott in New Orleans, February 1-3, 2024.
This is the long-running nationally-focused conference on all things eminent domain, takings, valuation, and related. We have three tracks, from which you can
Here’s the latest on a kind of strange case we’ve been following.
Our case starts off as a somewhat typical public use challenge. After a developer failed to negotiate purchase from Rubin an easement for a sewer line to serve a nearby housing project, the developer enlisted the Town of Apex to lend a
We don’t regularly cover unpublished opinions, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. 0.12 Acres of Land, No. 23-1069 (Oct. 11, 2023) got our attention because it involves a slight twist on the the Supreme Court’s ruling a couple of years ago in PennEast Pipeline Co.
Thanks to our co-authors for the latest issue of this recurring update.
The International Right of Way Association’s Real Estate Law Committee produces twice-a-year reports “which contain summaries of eminent domain decisions and legislation within the United States.” (This is the “international” right of way association, so that last qualifier is important.)
And what is
Why is it, you ask, that the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation Conference (scheduled next February 1-3, 2024, in New Orleans) is an event that seems to be growing in popularity and attendance. In recent years, we have standing room only in the Conference halls, and have sold out the hotel block.
Early registration is a good thing because space is limited, especially at the Wren Building banquet on the 26th, at which the 2023 B-K Property Rights
The latest in a case we’ve been following doesn’t get to the substantive issue: is a local park district authorized to take private property for a bike path when the statute authorizes takings for “conservation of natural resources?”
Instead, the Ohio Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for a familiar reason: lack of a final judgment.
A big thanks to friend and colleague Paul Henry for bringing to our attention this article by Andrew Stuttaford, UFOs and Eminent Domain.
No, it (unfortunately) is not the latest tenure-making scholarly law journal article (but we can dream, can’t we?), but a piece in National Review.
It details a proposal to release
Update: someone blinked – between the time we drafted this post and the time is actually posted, we understand that this case settled. But the “spite takings” issue remains of interest, so we’re leaving this post up.
——————————————————————————————
You already know about the prior public use issue, often arising in government-to-government takings.
As we’ve noted before, we think courts generally don’t like it when they are asked to revisit a dispute that was settled by agreement. Yes, settlement agreements are contracts, and just like every other contract they are subject to enforcement, breach actions, and the like.
But our experience is that courts are not keen
