Here is the Petitioner’s Reply Brief in Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson, No. 11-189 (cert. petition filed Aug. 11, 2011). We posted the cert petition and the amici and BIO here.
The cert petition is asking the Supreme Court to revist and discard the ripeness rules of Williamson County Regional
“There is strong consensus in the international scientific community that climate change is occurring and that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities contribute to climate change.”
So begins Climate Change and Regulatory Takings in Coastal Hawaii, a monograph by Douglas Codiga, Dennis Hwang, and Chris Delaunay, published by the University of Hawaii Sea Grant
Here are the latest briefs in a case we’ve been following. In Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2011), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a property owner’s claim that the city’s mobilehome rent control ordinance is a taking. The district court dismissed the facial
No, it’s not a takings claim, so Williamson County ripeness isn’t a part of the opinion. In Potrero Hills Landfill, Inc. v. County of Solano, No. 10-15229 (Sep. 13, 2011), the Ninth Circuit held that the Younger abstention doctrine did not prevent the district court from considering a § 1983 claim for declaratory and
There’s been yet another cert petition asking the Suprme Court to revist and discard the ripeness rules of Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985).
In Colony Cove Properties, LLC v. City of Carson, 640 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2011), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the
A cert petition has been filed by the property owners in a case we’ve been following about what the takings ripeness doctrine of Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) requires.
In Downing/Salt Pond Partners v. Rhode Island, 643 F.3d 16 (1st Cir. 2011), the
Another drive-by blog post today because we’re still at the ABA Annual Meeting in Toronto, and between meetings of the State and Local Goverment Law Section and scooping up as many CLE credits as possible, haven’t had much down time to detail the latest cases. But here’s one that’s worth reviewing on your own
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following. In Bridge Aina Lea, LLC v. State of Hawaii Land Use Comm’n, the plaintiff filed its complaint in state circuit court alleging that the LUC violated state and federal law (due process, takings, vested rights, and more) when it reclassified “urban” land on the Big
In Edwards v. City of Jonesboro, No. 10-2405 (July 14, 2011), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a takings claim brought in federal court after the property owner prevailed on the same claim in state court was not barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, but that the state court judgment
If you understand the title of this post, congratulations: you are a regulatory takings wonk.
The property owners have filed a cert petition asking the Supreme Court to review the Tenth Circuit’s decision in Alto Eldorado Partnership v. County of Santa Fe, 634 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2011). The Questions Presented explain the background