Here’s the final brochure for the upcoming ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Conference, set for January 26-28, 2017, in San Diego.
Early registration gets you a discount (code CY009MK), as does multiple registrations from one office, so now’s the time to commit to joining us for our annual gathering (the 34th Annual) of
We’ve teased some of the details on the 2017 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation and Condemnation 101 Conference, to be held at the Westin San Diego, January 26-28, 2017, but here are the details you’ve been waiting for.
This is the “big one,” our annual 3-day festival of all things eminent domain
Some states (mostly in the Midwest, to our knowledge) don’t really recognize inverse condemnation” claims, at least as we in other jurisdictions use that term. Instead of recognizing a direct cause of action for compensation and damages when government has taken property physically or by regulation without first instituting an eminent domain case, these jurisdictions
The Supreme Court has declined to review the Second Circuit’s summary order upholding the dismissal of a federal court regulatory takings claim on Williamson County ripeness grounds.
In this order, the Court denied cert, over the dissent of Justice Thomas (joined by Justice Kennedy). We’ve said here many times why Williamson County is a
Read this: “The Accidental Abstention Doctrine: After Thirty Years, the Case for Diverting Federal Takings Claims to State Court Under Williamson County Has Yet to Be Made,” by R.S. Radford and Jennifer Fry Thompson, published in the most recent edition of the Baylor Law Review.
If the title weren’t enough to
Let’s say that you didn’t know much about regulatory takings, or municipal employment and Fair Labor Standards law (in our case, the latter would most certainly be correct). And let’s say you were asked to predict how the plaintiff would fare with a claim that the city’s regulatory regime for taxicabs was so oppressive that
All of the drama playing out in the North Carolina Supreme Court yesterday as the court heard oral arguments in its review of Kirby v North Carolina Dep’t of Transportation, No. COA14-184 (Feb. 17, 2015) came down — as they often do in these things — to a single question from the bench, and
Here’s the latest on a takings case that is winding its way through the U.S. District Court in Honolulu. Yes, you read that right: a takings case being litigated in federal court.
Intrigued? Read on.
We’ve covered this case and the related state court litigation several times here before, so this isn’t entirely unfamiliar ground. This
Austin, Texas, is where we’re at for the next few days, for the 2016 edition of the American Law Institute-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation conference, now in its 33d year. First time we’re in Austin, however, and our registration numbers are looking very good, and we haven’t had this big a turnout in years.
Back to the Hawaiian-only election. Here’s an interview from ThinkTech Hawaii which asks “Is Nai Aupuni Sponsored by the State Government?“
The interview is conducted by the plaintiff in the Akina v. Hawaii case, and the interviewees are one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs, Michael Lilly, and the other is U.
