Check out the North Dakota Supreme Court’s opinion in Cass County Joint Water Resource District v. Aaland, No. 20200171 (Mar. 24, 2021). It’s a quick read, and worth your time.
North Dakota has one of those “precondemnation entry” statutes allowing a (potential) condemnor to enter private property to check it out to see if
Pop quiz: in eminent domain valuation proceedings, may an owner who is not qualified as an expert witness testify about the value of her or his own property?
If you said “yes,” most courts would agree with you, either as percipient witness testimony or as lay expert testimony. As would the U.S. Court of
Not our usual takings fare, but our readers are pretty forgiving about our occasional sidebars. And this one is otherwise relevant if you are wondering how governors and other executive state and municipal officials have the power to do things in events deemed to be emergencies.
So here’s the final, as-published version of the law
We suggest you take a read through the California Court of Appeal’s opinion in Felkay v. City of Santa Barbara, No. B304964 (Mar. 18, 2021). It’s all there: Lucas wipeout takings, futility and exhaustion, coastal zone property rights.
This is an inverse condemnation case, seeing compensation for the city denying the owner any economically
You listened live. Or you missed that, and listened to the recording. Or, you preferred to review what others thought of the arguments. Now you can read it yourself.
Here’s the transcript of Monday’s oral arguments in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, No. 20-107, the case in which the Supreme Court
In which we join the Pendulum Land Podcast (again, thank you hosts!) to talk about the Virginia Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Johnson v. City of Suffolk, the case we label the “oyster takings” case in which Hampton Roads oystermen claimed that their property was taken when the City of Suffolk and the Sanitation
Here are links to the summaries and analysis of yesterday’s oral arguments in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, No. 20-107, the case asking whether California’s forbidding of agricultural property owners from keeping out union organizers is a taking:
Neutral
Here’s the recorded arguments.
Hold on. What is a criminal appeal, Comm’w of Pennsylvania v. Solomon, No. 1407 MDA 2018 (Mar. 16, 2021) doing on inversecondemnation.com?
The case involved a theft of collectible coins. The defendant was sentenced (inter alia) to pay restitution to the victim. The issue: how to value those coins.
After starting
Dig this: property owners assert that the County’s right of way dedication ordinance is an unlawful exaction. You know the drill – logical nexus, rough proportionality, etc. Nollan, Dolan, Koontz. Here’s the short story: the owners sought subdivision plat approval without the dedication for public roads required by the ordinance. No deal. The County’s process