There’s a lot going on in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s opinion in Tejas Motel, L.L.C. v. City of Mesquite, No. 22-10321 (Mar. 22, 2023), but that’s mostly because it’s a procedural decision resolving a question of whether a Texas court’s federal takings judgment was res judicata, and therefore
“Property Rights Are Human Rights” – “Defending Private Property: Principles of Justice in Rothbard’s Ethics of Liberty” (Dr. Wanjiru Njoya)
The Murray N. Rothbard Memorial Lecture, presented by Dr. Wanjiru Njoya. As noted on the Mises Institute’s website:
Recorded at the 2023 Austrian Economics Research Conference hosted at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, March 16–18.
The Austrian Economics Research Conference is the international, interdisciplinary meeting of the Austrian School, bringing together leading scholars
Tomorrow Is Hawaii’s Secular Good Friday Holiday – How So?
Even if the world were open tomorrow, the doors to most Hawaii state, county, and city offices would still be locked. Because Friday, April 7 is the day that Hawaii celebrates Good Friday.
Yes, Good Friday is an an official state-sanctioned holiday in the 808 area code, so we’re reposting our annual recounting of
Join Us At The 22d Annual Texas Eminent Domain Conference, April 13-14, Austin
If you are in the Austin area (or anywhere in Texas for that matter), please consider joining us April 13 and 14, 2023 for the 22d Annual Texas Eminent Domain Conference.
Two days of great programming and talking shop, plus a chance to connect and re-connect with friends and colleagues. And, of course, all
New Construction In California’s Coastal Zone Must Be Designed For Future Removal
You already know what the Court of Appeal held, don’t you?
Hurst v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n, No. D079549 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 20, 2023) (unpub.)
CA8: Where A State’s Just Comp Remedy Is Inadequate, You Can Sue For Injunctive Relief For A Taking
Check out the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit’s opinion in Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America v. Williams, No. 21-1731 (Apr. 3, 2023), where the court reinstated a complaint dismissed by the district court for lack of standing.
The Eighth Circuit held that even though the “usual” remedy for a regulatory
Bad Dog! Drug K-9 Putting Paws On Car Is A “Search” Because It’s A Trespass To Chattels
Doc Brown … err Bill Blackstone approves
Today’s case, State of Idaho v. Dorff, No. 48119 (Mar. 20, 2023) involves the Fourth Amendment, not the Fifth.
But ever since the U.S. Supreme Court returned to a property-based view of the Search and Seizure clause of the Fourth, property rights mavens’ ears perk up any
Bust A Deal, Face The Wheel: NYC Rendering Commercial Lease Guaranty Clauses Unenforceable For Co-19 Violates Contracts Clause
This just in: the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has issued this Opinion & Order in the case which challenges New York City’s rendering “guaranty clauses” in commercial leases unenforceable due to the declared Co-19 emergency.
This is a case we’ve been following. Earlier, the Second Circuit vacated the district
“Larry Steven Wilkins and Jane Stanton wanted quiet titles and a quiet road.” 6-3 SCOTUS Says Federal Quiet Title Act Statute Of Limitations Is Not Jurisdictional
We all know by now that the Supreme Court recently has been on a tear about federal statutes of limitations, and is policing up a lot of earlier too-casual language in some of its opinions about whether this SOL or that SOL is “jurisdictional.” In a series of opinions over the last few years, the Court has almost universally confirmed that it used the term rather loosely, and that upon further review, many statutes of limitations are not “jurisdictional” but are “claims processing rules.”
The Court’s 6-3 opinion in Wilkins v. United States, No. 21-1164 (Mar. 28, 2023) is another in a line of decisions so holding. Wilkins involves the Federal Quiet Title Act’s 12-year SOL (see this preview of the issues by our friend and colleague Stephen Davis). The bottom line is that Wilkins concluded the QTA’s SOL is a claims processing rule because Congress did not “clearly state” that the SOL is jurisdictional.
We’ll leave it to you to read the six-Justice majority opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, and the three-Justice dissent authored by Justice Thomas, because this case is one where our law firm represents a party, the prevailing petitioners. Our colleague Jeffrey McCoy argued the case a couple of months ago (nice job, Jeff!).
Unfortunately, a lot of the reporting on the decision treat it as a wonky, technical issue (which, admittedly, it is), but in so doing regrettably overlook the importance of the case. For the reasons why we think it is very important, read this. And for some of the reporting that gets why the case is important (and which note the somewhat unexpected line up of Justices) see:
- Liberals unite with Trump Supreme Court nominees in decision against federal land grab (Washington Examiner)
- Victory for Property Rights in Highly Technical Supreme Court Decision (Ilya Somin, Volokh Conspiracy)
The bottom line is that the property owners will get their day in court, and not get tossed out for an arcane, overly-technical reason. And that sounds like a very good thing.
CA4: Exactions Takings Claim Accrues When Owner Knows Of The Demand, Not When It Paid
As most of you probably already know, there’s a demon lurking out there in takings claims. Not of the Levon Helm-narrated The Right Stuff variety, but maybe just as deadly in litigation.
That’s right, the too-early-or-too-late thing (or in some cases, the too-early-and-too-late argument). Getting caught between arguments that a takings claim