Land users and dirt lawyers know Dwight Merriam. (And if you don’t, you are not really a land user, are you?)
He’s won landmark cases (has even beaten Yours Truly in one of those cases way back in the day). Written tons of articles and books. Edits Rathkopf. Contributes to Nichols. Mentored multiple generations
Synchronicity (Jung, not The Police). Serendipity. Lattice of coincidence. Whatever you call it, sometimes things seem to come in waves.
So it seems with the statue of limitations for inverse and regulatory takings claims this week. We had not dealt with the issue for a while. Radio silence. Then boom! The
Here’s one we’re posting without comment, because the Complaint was filed today by my Damon Key colleagues. But here’s a summary of the issues, from the press release:
On August 1, 2019, the Hawaii Vacation Rental Owners Association and Honolulu land use attorney Greg Kugle of the Damon Key law firm, filed a lawsuit in
Recently, we requested crowdsourcing of this year’s “come to the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain Conference video.” Instead of doing the video ourselves, we asked folks to “please send a short clip of you and/or your colleagues telling us why you think the Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference is the place to be
Details soon. In the meantime, get your earlier registration discount.
The Land Use Committee of the ABA’s Section of State and Local Government Law is sponsoring a free (for Section members) informal webinar about the latest in takings law:
Knick Picking Regulatory Takings: Did the Court Right a Wrong, or Wrong a Right?
Friday, July 26 | 2 – 2:30pm ET
Here’s hoping you can
I am grateful that planning chairs Justin Hodge and Jeremy Baker invited me to their conference. A room full of experts. Here are the links to the cases and other items I spoke about:
Looking for something to do this Tuesday? How about reading a 120-page federal court complaint challenging New York’s recently-adopted rent control/stabilization statute as a taking?
Thank you, Knick.
Here’s the article, recently published in the UMKC Law Review with thoughts on Murr v. Wisconsin, the case about the “denominator” issue in regulatory takings cases.
We won’t get into it in detail (if you are interested, you can read the article yourself), except to say that therein we offer views of what
Yes, this is detail from the Supreme Court’s front door.
This is the first in what will be a short series of five posts with thoughts on the landmark decision in Knick. In this installment, a crash course in the extensive doctrinal background necessary to understand why the Knick Court did what it did. Here
