Another one (short) from the Kansas Supreme Court, this time a straight takings case, and not inverse condemnation.
In Pener v. King, No. 114850 (Mar. 24, 2017), the court tackled several issues in a case involving KDOT’s taking of land for highway project. Part of the taking required KDOT to take down the
A noteworthy decision from the Kansas Supreme Court in Creegan v. State of Kansas, No. 111082 (Mar. 24, 2017).
The facts of the case are pretty simple. Kansas DOT purchased land in a subdivision subject to restrictive covenants (CC&R’s) which required all property within the subdivision to be used for single-family residential only. KDOT didn’t
We were in the neighborhood recently, so our Canadian colleague Shane Rayman suggested we pay a visit to the site of the largest expropriation (taking) of land in that country’s history, and what has been described as “the largest population displacement … since the 18th-century expulsion of the Acadians from the Maritimes.”
We’re talking about
Here’s what we’re reading this Friday:
Here’s the cert petition, docketed yesterday, in a case we’ve been following on legislatively-imposed permit exactions, an issue in dire need of Supreme Court resolution.
Here’s the Question Presented:
A City of West Hollywood ordinance requires that builders of a proposed 11-unit condominium pay a $540,393.28 “affordable housing fee” to subsidize the construction of low-cost housing elsewhere
No, this isn’t the Supreme Court, it’s Graceland,
purchased by Elvis in March 1957.
(We’re just checking whether you are paying attention.)
Appellate oral argument, as they say, is supposed to be a “conversation” between the bench and counsel. But the overall impression we were left with after reviewing the transcript of yesterday’s Supreme Court
For those of you, like us, who were not able to be in DC for today’s oral arguments in the “larger parcel” or “denominator” case, Murr v. Wisconsin (see our preview of the arguments here), here’s the transcript, hot off the press.
We think we can find a takings angle in nearly anything. See here (net neutrality) here (the Supreme Court’s Obamacare decision), and here (a visit to Los Alamos, NM) for past examples.
So when reviewing last week’s U.S. District Court (D. Hawaii) order granting a nationwide TRO prohibiting enforcement of President Trump’s executive order
As takings mavens are no doubt already aware, next Monday, the 8-Justice Supreme Court will hear arguments in Murr v. Wisconsin, the regulatory takings case which asks whether the county can avoid application of the Lucas wipeout standard on one parcel by taking advantage of the fact that the plaintiffs also own the
Here’s a case you should be following which involves both public use and just comp issues, now before the Louisiana Supreme Court.
The case is an appeal in an expropriation case from a quick-take of a Mississippi River docking facility downriver from New Orleans. The Port took the entire VDP facility, made no change