Note: this is the second of our posts on the recent Supreme Court opinions in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the case in which the unanimous Court held that exactions imposed by legislation are not exempt from the essential nexus (Nollan) and rough proportionality (Dolan) standards. Here’s our first post
Devillier v. Texas (Part II): After Rope-a-Dope By Texas, Unanimous SCOTUS Saves The State Immunity Issue For Later
Note: this is the second of our posts on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Devillier v. Texas. The first — which tries to put the weird post-opinion controversy over which party “won” at the Supreme Court into its proper perspective — is here.
In this post we’ll cover the case’s
In Devillier v. Texas, The Winner Takes It All (Part I)
The winner takes it all
The loser’s standing small
Beside the victory
That’s her destiny
Note: this is the first of a short series of posts on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Devillier v. Texas.
In Part II, we’ll cover the case, the procedural path that Texas dragged everyone through,
$48 Million The Hard Zoning Way: Thanks To NIMBYs And NIMTOOs, Las Vegas Must Pony Up A Lucas Takings Judgment
If there’s a money quote in yesterday’s opinion by the Supreme Court of Nevada which “wholly affirm[ed] a trial court judgment awarding $48 million in just compensation for Las Vegas’s regulatory taking in City of Las Vegas v. 180 Land Co., LLC, No. 24-13605 (Apr. 18, 2024), it might just be this sentence:
Although
Sheetz pt. I – “Radical Agreement” At SCOTUS: “Your Money Or Your Rights” Isn’t OK Just Because A Legislature Does It
Guess where we stopped for coffee this morning?
(A reminder: this case has nothing to do
with the convenience store.)
Note: this is the first of two posts on the recent Supreme Court opinions in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the case in which the unanimous Court held that exactions imposed by
Sheetz Round-Up
Here’s what folks are saying about yesterday’s unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, where the Court held that impact fees and exactions imposed by legislative action are not categorically immune from the close nexus and rough proportionality requirements already applicable to ad hoc/administratively-imposed exactions under Nollan, Dolan, and
Unanimous SCOTUS Delivers A YIMBY Blow: “The Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative permit conditions.”
This just in: the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, a case we’ve been following (not only because it is one of ours).
The Court, as predicted, held that an exaction (in this case a traffic impact fee) isn’t immune from the Nollan/Dolan nexus
Pay To Play? Cal SCT Asked If Challenger Must First Pay A Fee To Object To Zero Water Allocation As A Taking
This one takes a bit of sifting through, but if you do so, you will eventually savor the arguments. Try and follow this thread.
In 2014, pistachio growers with what seemed to be established rights to pump groundwater for irrigation of their trees and who never had to pay fees or were subject to other
Thursday Takings Round-Up: Rent Control, Traditional Forums For Public Speech
Commit To Submit: Call For Papers “Imagining the Future of Regulatory Takings”
Have thoughts about where regulatory takings are (or should be) headed? Here’s your chance to get in on the conversation, and to shape the future of the law.
Our outfit, the Pacific Legal Foundation, in cooperation with the Antonin Scalia Law School’s Journal of Law, Economics, and Policy, are calling for papers on “Imagining