Yesterday (yes, April Fool’s Day), we returned to William and Mary Law School to help the student-run Real Estate Law Society wrap up its event year. The putative title of our talk was “Hot Topics in Property Law”, but we covered a wider range, including Dirt Law issues to be on the lookout for at the Supreme Court, a century of zoning, career paths in property law (litigation, transactional, academic, for example, and what the hiring market looks like), and some general musings. …
Continue Reading William & Mary Law School’s Real Estate Law Society

Check this out. A new cert petition on an issue we think is a good one. Let’s just cut to the chase (you can read the petition for the background). Here are the Questions Presented: Whether an approved vesting tentative map which conferred a statutory vested right to finalize a subdivision upon substantial compliance with the conditions of approval is property protected by the Takings Clause?
Continue Reading New Cert Petition: Is A Vested Permit A Separate “Stick” Of Private Property?

When you think of “Vermont roads,” the first images that might come to mind are mountain byways, covered bridges, and “highways” that elsewhere might qualify as backroads. All the above is prelude, because it is here along I-95 south of White River Junction, that today’s story lay. Romaine Tenney was one of those classic Vermonters. He entered the pages of history more than fifty years ago when, in reaction to the taking of his farm for Interstate 91, he burned his house and farm buildings down, and shot himself. He had nowhere else to go. …
Continue Reading Romaine Tenney Lives: “They Stole His Land and Gave Him No Choice!”

We’ve been holding on to this eminent domain necessity decision from the Vermont Supreme Court because we were scheduled to pay a visit to the Green Mountain State (more on that in a subsequent post), and we wanted to include some photos (photos are always good in an otherwise dry law blog post). Mongeon Bay Properties, LLC v. Town of Colchester, No. 25-AP-125 (Jan. 23, 2026), is an eminent domain case where the Town tried to condemn the property (shown above) which is part of a larger unsubdivided parcel owned by Mongeon on the shore of Malletts Bay (part of Lake Champlain). The court invalidated the taking, holding that the Town failed to prove the statutory elements of necessity.
Continue Reading Vermont And The Bare Necessities: Taking Was Unnecessary Because Town Didn’t Bother To Meet Statutory Requirements

In New York v. Commons West, LLC, No. CV-23-1255 (Mar. 5, 2026), the Appellate Division of New York’s Supreme Court (dun-dun) invalidated a New York statute that forbid property owners from considering a prospective tenant’s source of income when deciding to whom to rent a property. The legislature effectively required owners to “accept Section 8 vouchers and, as a condition of participating in that program, agree to allow search of their properties and records.” Slip op. at 5. The court held this violates the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. …
Continue Reading NY App Div: Requiring Property Owners To Accept Section 8 Tenants Violates Fourth Amendment

A newly-filed property rights cert petition worth watching. [Disclosure: this one is from our firm, so we won’t be commenting.] Here are the Questions Presented: “Whether Maine’s requirement that lobstermen place a GPS tracking device on their private fishing vessels and submit to 24/7 surveillance constitutes an unreasonable trespassory search in violation of the Fourth Amendment?”…
Continue Reading New 4A Property Rights Cert Petition: Govt GPSing Your Boat Is Warrantless Search

We don’t know what the real story is in this report from SF Gate, “Calif. town pauses housing project after French Laundry chef criticism.” But if you had to pick a single story that captures a century of Euclidean vibe, where “neighborhood character” objections (first affirmed in that case) can kill what might be a good thing because neighbors can anonymously vote how someone uses their own property, you couldn’t do better than this one.
Continue Reading Euclid’s “Neighborhood Character” Vibe, Exemplified In Land Use Fight In The Heart Of The Napa Valley

Here’s a case we’ve been following (esp. because our firm is counsel for the two intervenors). In Montanans Against Irresponsible Densification, LLC v. Montana, No. DA 25-0200 (Mar. 17, 2026), the Montana Supreme Court upheld the “Montana miracle” housing and zoning reform statute against an equal protection challenge. This case is important not only because it upholds loosening of restrictions on housing development and private property rights, but because it also confirms the freedom of contract, and recognizes that private owner remain free to control the use of their own property in the best manner they see fit. …
Continue Reading YIMBY v NIMBY In Montana Supreme Court: “housing reform statutes do not violate the right to equal protection solely because the law treats people not subject to private covenants differently.”