Check this out: a podcast from Free to Choose Media, entitled “Eminent Domain,” published a couple of months ago.
But the description reveals a time capsule:
Recorded in 2003, Dennis McCuistion, former Clinical Professor of Corporate Governance and Executive Director of the Institute for Excellence in Corporate Governance at the University of Texas
This past week we were busy with the 22d Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference at the William and Mary Law School.
Here’s the text of the remarks which I prepared for the session on “Public Safety, Private Property, and Just Compensation.” Note: because of time, I truncated what I planned on saying and kept
As part of the Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference being held next week at the William and Mary Law School, the student-run Real Estate Law Society is producing a very interesting program that offers a look back on Kelo v. City of New London, in this that case’s twentieth year.
We’re going to
Be sure to check out the opinion of the Texas Court of Appeals (Fourteenth District) in Jones v. Port Freeport, No. 14-23-00948 (Sep. 18, 2025).
This is a challenge to the Port’s attempt to take property in an historic African-American community, with the stated purpose of the taking being “expansion of the Port Facilities” and “the development of business industries.” Slip op. at 3. The owners objected, asserting that there’s gotta be a plan. Or at least a better plan than that.
Continue Reading Tex App: No Plan, No Public Use, No Eminent Domain: “I’m from the [Port], and I’m here [for a public use]” Is Not EnoughWe have no idea what these cases might be about, or whether there is any substance behind the property owners’ objections, but these are headlines no condemnor could possibly like:
In United States v. 191.07 Acres of Land (Martinek) (No. 04-35131, Apr. 4, 2007), the Ninth Circuit addressed two interesting issues in the context of a federal taking of unpatented gold- mining claims in Alaska’s Denali National Park.
The first is a question of appellate procedure: whether a party waives the right to appeal the
In United States v. 191.07 Acres of Land (Martinek)(No. 04-35131, Apr. 4, 2007), the Ninth Circuit set out a good definition of “inverse condemnation” in the context of when a property owner has a right to a jury trial for federal takings.
Where the [condemnor] does not acquire privately owned land statutorily
The NY Times reports on the final chapter in the Wu Ping holdout drama:
Property disputes and illegal land grabs have accelerated recently as China’s economy expands at double-digit rates and farmland is gobbled up for industrial parks and skyscrapers. Government officials often have sided with developers, touching off riots and protests.
Check out this AP photo and the accompanying story “China’s ‘stubborn nail’ stands firm” —
Reminds me of the Warner Bros. classic “Homeless Hare,” where Bugs Bunny objects to a developer’s efforts to evict him from his hole: “Hey ya big gorilla, didn’t you ever hear about the sanctity of the American home
An interesting decision from the Kansas federal district court, Mount St. Scholastica, Inc. v. City of Atchison, No. 06-2208-CM (Mar. 12, 2007), contains a land use trifecta: historic preservation, religious objections to a denial of a permit, and regulatory takings. (No link yet to opinion, which currently is only available via Westlaw; email me