Here's the latest SCOTUS cert petition, filed by our law firm colleagues Dave Breemer and Deborah LaFetra. Because this is one of ours, we won't be commenting, but leave it to you to digest it yourself.
Here's the Question Presented:
Frank and Rachel Revere and David and Judith Kagan (Owners) own a duplex in Los Angeles, California, as tenants in common. The Reveres live in one unit. In 2019, the Reveres applied to the City to displace a month-to-month tenant in the other unit, so they could move in their own family members. The City denied the request, concluding the tenant was protected from eviction for a family move-in under Los Angeles’ Rent Stabilization Ordinance. The Owners sued, alleging the City’s decision forced them to suffer a physical taking of their property.The question presented is:Whether a law that bars termination of a tenancy, and compels the occupation of property by an unwanted tenant, amounts to a per se, physical taking, as the Eighth Circuit held in Heights Apartments, LLC v. Walz, 30 F.4th 720 (8th Cir. 2022), or is instead a permissible regulation of property under Yee v. City of Escondido, 503 U.S. 519 (1992), as the Ninth Circuit held below.
Stay tuned for more. Follow along on the Court's e-docket here.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Kagan v. City of Los Angeles, No. 22-739 (U.S. Feb. 7, 2023)
