Mark your calendars for September 30 – October 1, 2021, and join us at the William and Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Virginia for the 18th Annual Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference. It’s planned to be in-person, so when we mean “join us” we really mean join us.
This year the Conference will recognize the lifetime
Check out the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in Harrison v. Montgomery County, No. 20-4-51 (May 11, 2021). It’s short, readable. And, most importantly, involves a subject that’s near and dear: takings, and the myriad potential traps that await an unsuspecting property owner making such a claim.
If you’ve ever
OK, we get that law is a serious business and that one should never make light of others’ situations. Each person’s claim is important to them, at the very least.
But after reading today’s Federal Circuit opinion (unpublished, nonprecedential) in Bench Creek Ranch, LLC v. United States, No. 20-2151 (May 7, 2021), we couldn’t
We’re hoping that someone can explain the Florida District Court of Appeal’s recent opinion in Bondar v. Town of Jupiter Inlet Colony, No. 4D19-2118 (May 5, 2021) in a way that makes sense other than the old apocryphal tale of “I don’t know why we do things this way, except that we’ve always done
R.S. Radford’s most-recent article, Knick and the Elephant in the Courtroom: Who Cares Least About Property Rights? in the latest issue of the Texas A&M Journal of Property Law, should be next on your to-read list.
Here’s the summary of the article:
Throughout the thirty-four-year history of Williamson County, one fact was taken for
That rail crossing in Chicago
We’ve noted before that gun cases have life of their own, often divorced from strict legal logic. Throw in takings, and you’ve got a recipe for a difficult challenge.
But add to the mix a Supreme Court überlawyer, and maybe your chances go up. Who knows for sure.
Two very interesting law review articles (essays) by well-known property experts are now available in the Notre Dame Law Review:
Here’s one we’ve been waiting to drop. In San Jacinto River Authority v. Medina, Nos. 19-0400, 19-0402 (Apr. 16, 2021), the Texas Supreme Court held that “statutory takings” under the Texas Government Code include both physical invasion takings as well as regulatory takings.
This case stems from flooding allegedly caused in part by the
We’ve been meaning to post this one for a while, and it appears our procrastination has paid off: the Court has asked for a response.
Normally, we’d summarize the case and the issues, but in this instance, the cert petition‘s Question Presented lays it all out:
Petitioner, Next Energy, LLC, commenced acquiring blocks
Takings! Armstrong! Emergencies! Mahon! Jacobson!
Add lawprof Shelley Ross Saxer’s latest article (forthcoming in the University of Hawaii Law Review), “Necessity Exceptions to Takings” to your reading list.
Rather than summarize it for you, we’ll just post the abstract:
The doctrine of necessity has strong roots in
