Word comes that the California Supreme Court has denied review of the Court of Appeal decision in Lockaway Storage v. County of Alameda, No. A30874 (1st Dist. May 9, 2013). The court also rejected a request to "depublish" the First District's opinion. Congratulations are again in order for colleague Tim Kassouni, who represents the property owners.
Lockaway is the case in which the First District upheld the trial court's finding of a Penn Central taking, affirming that the County of Alameda is liable for a temporary regulatory taking, and awarding the property owners nearly three-quarters of a million in attorney fees. This means the only avenue left open is a cert petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the County does so, it will probably have as much luck as the private property bar with convincing the Court to take a Penn Central case.
Here's the (now-denied) Petition for Review as well as two amici letters (League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties and the California Coastal Commission and the California State Lands Commission), that might preview what a cert petition might look like. We won't detail the arguments here, but let's just say the letters are particularly worth reading because of the faily extreme view of regulatory takings and Supreme Court precedent they take.
Petition for Review, Lockaway Storage v. County of Alameda, No. S211470 (filed June 18, 2013)
