A big thanks to my Owners Counsel of America and ABA State and Local Government Law Section colleague Dwight Merriam for emceeing today’s well-attended double session on land use and takings law at the International Municipal Lawyers Association’s 2013 annual meeting in San Francisco. Dwight and I were joined by land use expert Cecily
Here’s what we’re reading today:
If you are anywhere within striking distance of Touro Law School (Central Islip, Long Island), you should make plans to attend a conference that promises two days of fantastic programming on October 3 and 4, 2013.
“The Taking Issue – 40th Anniversary Symposium” is dedicated to the memory of the legendary Professor Fred
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in Temple B’Nai Zion, Inc v. City of Sunny Isles, No. 12-12094 (Aug. 29, 2013), held that the Williamson County ripeness doctrine did not prevent the Temple from bringing its RLUIPA (and related) claims in federal court.
The right result for sure. But wait, you
Just over a month ago, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that a federal takings case could actually proceed in federal court. Well yesterday, the same court issued a similar opinion in a related case, Town of Nags Head v. Toloczko, No. 12-1537 (Aug. 27, 2013).
We won’t go
Please join us this upcoming Monday, August 19, 2013 from 1:00 – 2:30 p.m. Pacific Time for a telebriefing, “Regulatory Takings Claims in California – Implications of Recent Decisions and Advice for Practitioners and Government Agencies.”
Brad Kuhn (Nossaman, California Eminent Domain Report) is the program Chair and will serve as moderator
Whoa, that was fast: in a case argued on August 2, 2013, and decided on August 9, 2013 (that’s one week from orals to opinion, folks), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Village of Maineville v. Salt Run, LLC, No. 12-4379 (Aug. 9, 2013), held that the property owner/plaintiff forfeited*
We’ve ranted extensively about how the takings-only ripeness rules of Williamson County just don’t hold water, but until the Supreme Court revisits and overrules that decision, we’re stuck with it. The federal courts we’re told, just don’t like sitting as “super zoning boards of appeal,” and adjudicating federal constitutional issues are simply beneath Article III
Here’s what we’re reading today:
What’s this, a federal court actually allowing a federal Fifth Amendment claim to be litigated in federal court? Why that’s as rare as hen’s teeth, although it shouldn’t be.
That’s the ruling of the Fourth Circuit in Sansotta v. Town of Nags Head, No. 12-1538 (July 25, 2013), which reversed the district