Check this out, the Complaint we filed a couple of weeks ago in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, in Grano v. Rappahannock Elec. Coop., No. 3:20-cv-00065-NKM (W.D. Va. Oct. 28, 2020).
It’s not a true “takings” case because the claims for relief are limited to due process and Contract
Today, Friday, November 13, 2020, is the day that the Supreme Court is scheduled to decide whether to decide a case we’ve been following for a long time (and one in which we filed an amicus brief urging the Court to take up the case).
In Cedar Point Nursery v. Shiroma, 923
We listened live last week, but the court has now made the recording available in Johnson v. City of Suffolk.
This is what we call the “oyster takings” case in which Nansemond River oystermen claim that their property was taken when the City of Suffolk and the Sanitation District dumped sewage into the
Join us next Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 3pm ET (12 noon Pacific) for the free webinar “Shutdowns, Closures, Moratoria, and Bans,” produced by Pacific Legal Foundation and Owners’ Counsel of America.
Along with my colleagues Leslie Fields (Executive Director, OCA), and Jim Burling (PLF), I’ll be talking about the legal foundations for
To get your copy of the book, go here.
In case you missed any part of it: the recordings of the recent 2020 Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference are now available.
Go here for the descriptions of the panels, speakers, and links to the recorded sessions.
This year’s conference, held on October 1-2, opened with the Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Prize being awarded to Professor
After Knick knocked out the “state procedures” requirement of the Williamson County ripeness doctrine, we predicted that owners’ lawyers better dust off their Federal Courts treatises that have been sitting on our bookshelves for the last three decades.
We said that because we suspected the game was still afoot, and Knick alone would not overcome
Come join us for the book party for Professor David Callies’ recently published (by the ABA State and Local Government Law Section) book, “Regulatory Takings After Knick.”
We’re online (of course), so you don’t have to come to Honolulu – we’re on Zoom:
Date: Thursday, October 29, 2020
Time: 4-5pm Hawaii Time
RSVP: No
We all know that despite the heightened Twombly/Iqbal federal pleadings standard, that it doesn’t mean a whole lot if a complaint survives a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. All this means that the court thinks it is plausible that the complaint states a claim. And that the plaintiff gets to keep going. That’s it.
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following. In this Order, the Ninth Circuit denied rehearing and rehearing en banc of the 2-1 panel decision in Pakdel v. City & County of San Francisco, No. 17-17504 (9th Cir. Mar. 17, 2020).
Earlier, the panel concluded that a regulatory takings case was