If you are a member of the ABA, mark your calendars for Tuesday, February 26, 2013, noon to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time, for a free teleconference jointly sponsored by the ABA’s Section on Litigation’s Environmental Litigation Commitee and the Condemnation, Zoning, and Land Use Committee to discuss the latest and greatest in takings law
Aloha, Martin Luna
I did want to make a mention of a sad milestone I wish we didn’t have to come to, the passing of Maui’s irreplaceable land use lawyer B. Martin Luna. Here’s the report from the Maui News.
Having dealt with Martin over the years, he was a true gentleman, and everything that you conjure
Upcoming Hawaii Appellate Arguments Of Interest
The oral argument calendar of the Hawaii Supreme Court looks pretty interesting:
- Thursday, February 7, 2013, 11:00 a.m. – Sierra Club v. Land Use Comm’n, No SCWC-11-0000625, a case about the qualifications of holdover Land Use Commissioners, which we previewed here.
- Thursday, February 21, 2013, 10:00 a.m. – Kanahele v. Maui County Council
S. Carolina: “Substantially Advance” Means “Not Arbitrary And Capricious”
The speed of the internet: we were all set to summarize our thoughts on the South Carolina Supreme Court’s opinion in Dunes West Golf Club, LLC v. Town of Mount Pleasant, No. 2011-194211 (Jan. 9, 2013), a case involving equal protection, substantive due process, and takings claims, when Dean Patty Salkin at the Law
The Empire Strikes Back: Reaction To UH Lawprof’s Study Of Success Rates In Hawaii Supreme Court Cases
Here’s the inevitable reaction to U. Hawaii law Professor David Callies’ recently-published law review article (and follow-up interview) about the stunning success rates certain parties enjoy in the Hawaii Supreme Court. In that article, the good professor labeled the record of the 1993-2010 Hawaii Supreme Court on property issues “appalling,” so it should come
HAWICA Clarifies What Actions By Planning Dept Trigger Administrative Zoning Appeals
The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals, in a unanimous panel opinion authored by Judge Foley, held that a “zoning verification” by the Director of the City and County’s Department of Planning and Permitting is not a “decision of the Director” which a property owner must administratively appeal to the Honolulu Zoning Board of Appeals. Hoku
We Can Try To Understand The New York Times’ Effect On Man (When It Opines On Eminent Domain Law)
Does the editorial board of the New York Times really have the stones to start off its latest editorial about the Takings Clause, “Where Is the Taking?“, with this:
When a city condemns private property to make way for a public highway, that is a classic “taking” for which government must provide “just
More On Koontz Oral Arguments: Is Nollan A Theory Dependent Upon Accepting An Unconsitutional Condition, Then Challenging It As A Taking?
We’re tied up all day in the 10th Hawaii Land Use Law Conference, but two other bloggers have stepped up to fill the gap, offering cogent analysis and some contrarian thoughts about the recent oral arguments in Koontz v. St Johns River Water Mgmt Dist., No. 11-1447 (cert. granted Oct. 5, 2012).
Most
The Good, The Bad, And The Scalia: Koontz Oral Argument Round-Up
In addition to our summary of and reaction to yesterday’s oral arguments in Koontz v. St Johns River Water Mgmt Dist., No. 11-1447 (cert. granted Oct. 5, 2012), here is the leading commentary from other sources:
- Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog: “The very idea that an unconstitutional “taking” had occurred to an owner of
SCOTUS Arguments In Monetary Exactions Case: (Sliced) Bread And Circuses
When you are a property owner making a takings argument and Justice Scalia gives you a hard time at oral argument, you would be safe in thinking that you’ve got an uphill battle.
That was the situation today during the oral argument (transcript here) in Koontz v. St Johns River Water Mgmt Dist.