Like that old radio bit “Chicken Man” (“He’s everywhere! He’s everywhere!“), it looks like the robed ones down at 1 First Street NE are, like us, seeing takings lurking in cases where takings may not be the first thing on the menu.
For example, in yesterday’s opinions about whether the Sixth
Here’s the cert petition that along with our colleague Steve Jakubowski we’re filing today in Campbell v. United States, No. 19-___, in which we ask the Court to review the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the plaintiffs in a Court of Federal Claims takings case missed the Tucker Act’s statute of limitations (28 U.S.C. §
We don’t usually post trial court decisions, but when one comes along that tees up some interesting issues and is likely to get pushed further up the food chain, we’re all ears.
That’s the case with the Eastern District of North Carolina’s order in Zito v. North Carolina Coastal Res. Comm’n, No. 2:19-CV-11-D (Mar.
As long-time readers know, we often kvetch about the way many courts ignore the Palazzolo rule that simply because someone obtains property subject to preexisting restrictions on use does not preclude them automatically from raising takings claims. See here, here, here, and here, for example. More about the Palazzolo case here, including
This just in. In Pakdel v. City and County of San Francisco, No. 17-17504 (Mar. 17, 2020), a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a regulatory takings claim which the District Court threw out for not being ripe under Williamson County‘s “state procedures”
Missed out on the 2021 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference swag?
Well fear not: here’s your chance to get your high-class reminder — a kit of road warrior essentials — to save the Conference date on your calendar. We’re already underway with planning the agenda and faculty, so it’s never too soon
Here’s the video of the OA held this morning (March 10, 2020) in a case we’ve been following, about the statute of limitations governing inverse claims. Maryland Reclamation Association filed an regulatory takings claim in 2013, and eventually the jury awarded a whopping $45 million in just compensation and interest. Hartford County asserted the
Here are the final cert-stage briefs in a case we’ve been following for what seems to be a long time.
We say that because we represented the property owner the last time it was up before SCOTUS, when we came tantalizingly close to making the cut.
After the Court denied review, the property
At the recent ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference in Nashville, our colleagues, New York’s Jon Houghton and Hawaii’s Dave Day presented a very informative program on litigating regulatory takings cases. Jon is a property owner-side lawyer, while Dave is a Deputy Attorney General who represents the State of Hawaii in such
Here’s the latest in a long-running, multi-forum takings case about the development of affordable housing on the Big Island of Hawaii.
Last we saw, the District Court awarded nominal compensation ($1), after the jury concluded that the State of Hawaii took Aina Lea’s property. The parties cross-appealed: the State argues the district court should have