Check out the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit’s opinion in 301, 712, 2103 and 3141 LLC v. City of Minneapolis, No. 20-3493 (Mar. 14, 2022), in which the court held that a Minneapolis ordinance prohibiting property owners from rejecting a prospective tenant because of the applicant’s criminal, credit, or rental history
CA4: Just Comp Isn’t The Only Remedy For A Taking
Here’s a really short one from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Not published, so even shorter than you might expect.
In Virginia Hospital & Healthcare Ass’n v. Kimsey, No. 20-2176 (Mar. 1, 2022), the court rejected the Commonwealth’s argument that the sole remedy for a takings claim is just compensation.
CAFED: Fed Takeover Of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac Not An “Exaction,” Not A Taking
We gotta be honest here: when the substantive portion of an opinion (even an opinion about takings and exactions) begins with, “Congress created the Enterprises to, inter alia, provide liquidity to the mortgage market…” our eyes kind of glaze over. It’s going to be one of those opinions.
But we soldiered on, and slogged
Wash App: No Taking Of Right To Exclude Because Eviction Moratorium Merely Lets Tenants Remain
Lately, we’ve been zeroing in on one of the lesser known parts of the Supreme Court’s takings canon, Yee v. City of Escondido, 503 U.S. 519 (1992), where the Court concluded that a city ordinance that limited the amount a property owner could charge a tenant for rent was not a physical invasion taking.
New Article: Common Sense and Common Law: Defining “Property” in Cedar Point v. Hassid
Thank you to the editors over at The Practical Real Estate Lawyer for publishing my missive on Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent blockbuster regulatory takings decision (and for letting me post a copy of the article here so it is available even if you are not a PREL subscriber).
Important Developments In Canada (No, Not That!): Supreme Court Hears Argument In “Takings” Case
Sorry about the headline, but come on, man! We have to use clickbaity headlines every now and then to get your attention. Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada heard oral arguments in Annapolis Group Inc v. Halifax Regional Municipality, a case involving “de facto
2022 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain And Land Valuation Litigation Conference, Scottsdale: You Should Have Been There!
After a two-year absence in which we went remote, in the last week of last month (our usual spot on the calendar, between the playoffs and Super Bowl), we once again met in-person for the American Law Institute-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference.
Approximately 200 lawyers, judges, legal scholars, appraisers, law students
CA9: We Reject Legislative/Administrative Distinction In Exactions, But City Requirement That Owners Pay Tenant To Move Back Into Their Home Isn’t A Taking
Before we go further into the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Ballinger v. City of Oakland, No. 19-16-550 (Feb. 2, 2022), this disclosure: this is a case in which our law firm represents the property owners. So take that into account as you read our take on the case.
The Ballingers own a home
Inverse Condemnation Isn’t Tort, OK
A short one from the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
In Rocket Properties, LLC v. LaFortune, No. 120000 (Jan. 18, 2022), the court issued an order that, in effect, reverses the trial court’s dismissal of an inverse condemnation case (we say “in effect” because the Supreme Court was considering a writ of prohibition, not an appeal).
The Circle Is Now Complete: A Sampling Of Final Paper Topics From William and Mary Law’s Eminent Domain & Property Rights, And Land Use Courses
If you ever get the opportunity to teach in a law school — either as a full-time legal scholar, or part-time as an expert adjunct practitioner — take it if you can. You might think you know a lot about a particular subject, but there’s nothing like spending time at the lectern in a law