The flag of the State of Hatu
Williams, a prisoner, thought that Utah prison officials should have paid him interest on his prison account. Acting as his own attorney, he sued under § 1983 for a taking and for a deprivation of due process in federal court, raising claims against the Utah Department of Corrections
Back to Knick for a bit. Our colleague Dwight Merriam has penned a response to a recent op-ed by U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D – RI).
The good senator, if you weren’t aware, was also the guy who argued and lost the Palazzolo case all the way back in 2001. Apparently, he’s still sore about
Here’s the latest cert petition about an issue we’ve been following closely. Givens v. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, No. ___ (July 3, 2019)
As regular readers understand, several federal courts of appeals recently have upheld giving prejudgment possession of property to a private pipeline condemnor once a district has ruled in favor of the
Here’s the first post-Knick property owner victory. That was quick!
Now before you get too excited, this is a GVR (“grant, vacate, remand”) in which the Court, having decided Knick, granted the pending petition, vacated the judgment by the Ninth Circuit, and “REMANDED for further consideration in light of Knick v. Township of Scott
We’ve resisted for as long as we can.
Here’s our take at telling the Williamson County and Knick story, 100% in memes.
Why, you may rightly ask?
Well, it started with our Knick amicus brief, which included a meme that we thought captured well the injustice of property owners being prohibited by Williamson
Here’s a question. Domestic partnership hit the skids, ended up in Family Court. That court did what family courts do and divided up the couple’s assets. The partners were not married, so one of the issues was whether they were in a “committed intimate relationship.” Family court held no. Decision appealed, and eventually sent back to
Eminent domain lawyers know that even though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the property owner in Kelo, it acknowledged that there was a (slight?) hope in some cases where the condemnor’s stated public use or purposes is actually “pretext” to private benefit.
Pretext may be present in at least three situations: (1) when eminent
We’ve already set out our general thoughts about the Supreme Court’s decision in Knick v. Township of Scott in a series of posts on the case. But we haven’t yet noted what the case might mean on the ground in Hawaii, our home turf.
In a client alert we did: Hawaii’s property owners now
Here’s the summary of the podcast:
The U.S. Supreme Court will soon consider the third of several petitions for certiorari asking it to
Here’s the cert petition in a case we’ve been following.
In Guerin v. Fowler, 899 F,3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2018), a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit held that Washington state officials’ failure to return daily interest that was allegedly skimmed from the plaintiffs’ state-managed retirement accounts could be a taking.
The panel rejected
