To all those who attended today’s seminar, thank you. Here are the links to the cases I mentioned. From the morning session on Case Law Update:
…
As reported here, a lawsuit was filed in Arizona state courts seeking to invalidate Sedona, Arizona’s prohibition on short-term rentals (less than 30 days):
Approximately 450 short-term rental properties in Sedona have beenimpacted by the new Ordinance making it illegal to advertise short-termrentals, and the Code prohibiting short-term rentals.
This ordinance was enacted by…
The San Francisco Chronicle posts “Maui County closes unlicensed bed and breakfasts and vacation rentals,” with background on the issue and the pending Ninth Circuit appeal.
In what is becoming a divisive battle – bothin court and in residential neighborhoods – the owners of the B&Bsand rental homes charge that the new
…
In Palmyra Pacific Seafoods, L.L.C. v. United States, No 07-35L (Jan. 22, 2008), the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (the article I court that hears inverse condemnation claims against the federal government) held that federal regulations which prohibited commercial fishing in waters around Palmyra Atoll and Kingman Reef did not take the plaintiffs’ licenses…
I promised back in this post to digest the Hawaii Supreme Court’s opinion in Colony Surf, Ltd. v. Director of the Dep’t of Planning and Permitting, No 26037 (Dec. 26, 2007). However, because the opinion is so opaque it is difficult to understand, and the issue so narrow, I never quite got around to…
…
I’ve had a chance to review Matsuda v. City and County of Honolulu, No. 06-15337 (Jan 14, 2008), a decision by the Ninth Circuit on the Contracts and Due Process clauses, but which also involves how local governments exercise the power of eminent domain. The case revolves around Chapter 38 of the Honolulu Revised…
Tim Sandefur at PLF on Eminent Domain adds his thoughts about Matsuda v. City and County of Honolulu, No. 06-15337 (Jan 14, 2008).
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has issued an opinion in Matsuda v. City and County of Honolulu, No. 06-15337 (Jan 14, 2008), a case involving the city’s repeal of Chapter 38, Honolulu’s version of the “land reform act” at issue in Midkiff, allowing the conversion of condominium leases to…
These seemingly unrelated court decisions were tied together with a common thread: private agreements for the most part are not substitutes for public processes, whether it is eminent domain, rezoning, or the granting of permits.
Several courts determined that agreements in which government agreed with private parties to exercise eminent domain were invalid:
…
