You own a home built in 2002. A couple of years later, the county redevelopment authority decides that your home, and the properties your neighbors own, would together make a grand site for an industrial park. Your properties are “shovel-ready” (the authority’s term, not mine) and primed for industrial development.
So it decides your home
The New York Times posts a story, “House Stands as Legacy to Fight Against Developers,” about one woman’s refusal to sell her modest Seattle, Washington area home to a redeveloper, even when offered $1 million. If a picture is worth a thousand words…
While the case is not like Kelo — or the
In a major decision regarding eminent domain, whether the government must pay damages when its attempts to condemn property fail, and the standards applicable to challenging the government’s claim that a taking is for public use, the Hawaii Supreme Court today issued an opinion in County of Hawaii v. Richards, No. 28882, the consolidated
Overlawyered (chronicling the high cost of our legal system, it proclaims its mission to be) posts an item about the Bulldozed case, which we mentioned earlier today. In Royall pain to his critics, Walter Owens references a post by Jacob Sullum at Reason, and writes:
I can’t go on. I just can’t.
Following up on our earlier post, “‘No, I’m Spartacus!’” about the latest foul turn in the Bulldozed saga, the Institute for Justice (the folks who represented Susette Kelo) today announced that they are representing Carla T. Main, Bulldozed‘s author, in the defamation suit filed against her and and lawprof Richard Epstein (who
Thanks to Alan Ackerman for alerting us to the latest horrible development in the eminent domain cases out of Freeport, Texas. Recall that in Western Seafood Co. v. United States,No 04-41196 (5th Cir., Oct. 11, 2006), the court held that aprivate-to-private transfer for economic development that wasaccomplished as part of a “carefully considered development
In reviewing some of the comments posted on the Honolulu Advertiser’s November 1 report “Rail study doesn’t list all affected properties,” it seems several of the commenters have fairly severe misconceptions about how eminent domain law works in Hawaii. Let’s clear some up some myths.
On November 4, 2008, Honolulu voters are being asked to say yes or no to a proposed amendment to the Honolulu charter:
Shall the powers, duties, and functions of the city, through its director of transportation services, include establishment of a steel wheel on steel rail transit system?
A “yes” vote means that the proposed
The audio file (30mb mp3) of the Supreme Court of Hawaii oral arguments in County of Hawaii v. Richards, has been posted here. the appeal from two eminent domain actions on the Big Island of Hawaii.
West Hawaii Today reports on yesterday’s oral arguments in the Supreme Court of Hawaii in County of Hawaii v. Richards, the appeal from two eminent domain actions on the Big Island of Hawaii. [Disclosure: my Damon Key colleagues Ken Kupchak, Mark Murakami, and Christi-Anne Kudo Chock and I represent the property owners.]