If you know, you know.
Sad birthday wishes to our most un-favorite decision ever, Penn Central Transp. Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978), which turns 45 today.
Time has not treated the opinion well. Practitioners, judges, and legal scholars across the spectrum have called the three-factor Penn Central test for an
Today at 10am Hawaii Time (1pm PT/4pm ET), the Hawaii Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case asking whether a 1922 deed restriction imposed by the Territory of Hawaii on a land patent conveying fee simple title to a private owner, subject to the land always being used for “church purposes” (i.e
A short one (for us takings types) from the Hawaii Supreme Court.
In In re Surface Water Use Permit Applications, No. SCOT-21-0000581 (June 20, 2024), the court considered a challenge to the State of Hawaii Commission on Water Resource Management’s authority to impose conditions on a water permit. The applicant asserted that the nexus
This is a short one, and the title of this post pretty much sums up the Minnesota Supreme Court’s opinion in State of Minnesota v. Schaffer, No. A23-0036 (June 20, 2024).
The case addressed a frequently-occurring issue in jurisdictions which permit some kind of fee recovery in eminent domain cases. Where a statute permits
The California Coastal Commission is infamous for being the most out-of-control governmental agency in the nation. This regulatory leviathan fancies itself the undisputed czar of land use and other activities in its fiefdom, the California coastal zone.
Created in 1976 as an agency with regulatory authority across California’s 1,000+ miles of coast (and land in
Today is a good day to remember that legal emancipation had its roots in the “contraband” property theory. Here’s a post from a few years ago where we visited what we called “The Birthplace of a More Perfect Union” (Fort Monroe, Virginia).
The contraband property theory was itself very imperfect, and a compromise
A short one (per curiam is one two-sentence paragraph), with an interesting concurring opinions from the Florida District Court of Appeals (4th District).
In Vazquez v. City of Hallandale Beach, No. 4D2023-0833 (June 12, 2024), the court held that a restrictive covenant that ran with Vazquez’ land (and others in his subdivision, including the
DJK was adding a bedroom to an existing residence and needed a wastewater permit from Vermont’s environmental agency. The agency has a “presumptive isolation zone” around potable water supplies and septic systems in which a property owner is presumed to be barred from doing anything sewage related. In this case, the isolation zone for DJK’s
Our annual reminder that 809 years ago tomorrow (June 15), the “great charter” (Magna Carta) was executed at Runnymeade. (And yes, we know that due to the change in calendars in the interim it wasn’t necessarily this very day, and also that King John didn’t sign the document, but rather sealed several copies of it.)
Mark your calendars and register now for the upcoming American Law Institute-CLE webinar “Property Rights and Regulatory Takings at the Supreme Court.” The focus of this program is a summary and analysis (including “what’s next?”) of the two big property and eminent domain cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, Sheetz (exactions), and