According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the answer is a definitive yes....more
In Knick v. Township of Scott, 139 S.Ct. 2162 (2019), the Supreme Court reversed over three decades of precedent when it eliminated the requirement that a plaintiff exhaust state court remedies before pursuing a takings...more
The California Coastal Act is a regulatory regime with many layers and complexities. Generally, however, the Act requires development within a designated coastal zone to obtain a coastal development permit. This permit may be...more
In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374, holding that in order for a dedication or exaction to pass constitutional muster, in addition to establishing an “essential nexus”...more
Sea level rise is a critical issue facing public agencies and property owners throughout the United States. In California alone, this phenomenon could impact thousands of residences and businesses, dozens of wastewater...more
While there is a healthy debate over just how much the sea level will rise over the next 50 years, there is at least a general consensus that the sea level will rise. What this means for those on the coast depends on the...more
As you may recall, it wasn’t too long after the Governor issued his executive order mandating the closure of certain businesses in California that the first takings lawsuit was filed. (See our coverage of Gondola Adventures,...more
Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Knick v. Township of Scott (2019) 139 S.Ct. 2162 eliminated the requirement for a plaintiff to exhaust state court remedies before pursuing a takings challenge in federal court,...more
As first reported by our good friends at inversecondemnation.com, a lawsuit has been filed in California alleging that the response by state and county agencies to the COVID-19 situation violates the state and federal...more
5/11/2020
/ Business Closures ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Coronavirus/COVID-19 ,
Due Process ,
Equal Protection ,
Fifth Amendment ,
Inverse Condemnation ,
Right to Travel ,
Shelter-In-Place ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
State Constitutions ,
Takings Clause
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” The California Constitution contains a similar provision. Reading these constitutional...more
12/4/2019
/ Appeals ,
Beach Access ,
Beachfront Properties ,
California Coastal Commission ,
Coastal Real Estate ,
Fees ,
Fifth Amendment ,
Just Compensation ,
Licenses ,
Permits ,
Private Property ,
Property Dedication ,
Property Owners ,
Public Use ,
Real Estate Development ,
Real Estate Market ,
Recreation ,
Right of Access ,
State and Local Government ,
Takings Clause ,
Waterfront Properties
For over three decades, most property owners have been relegated to state courts when pursuing a takings claim against a state or local agency. In a 5-4 decision issued this week, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed itself and...more
6/24/2019
/ 42 U.S.C. §1983 ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Fifth Amendment ,
Inverse Condemnation ,
Just Compensation ,
Knick v Township of Scott Pennsylvania ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Property Owners ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
State Law Remedies ,
Takings Clause
Last week, Jeremy Jacobs posted an interesting article about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Horne v. Dep’t of Agriculture, No. 14-275 (U.S. Jun. 22, 2015), and its potential application to Endangered Species Act...more
2013 was a banner year for developers under the takings clause, as both the U.S. Supreme Court and California Supreme Court issued decisions expanding the developers’ ability to challenge exactions as unconstitutional. In...more
Every so often, a decision comes out that makes you stop for a second and take a breath. Generally, these decisions have two essential components: (1) they deal with a statute of limitations; and (2) they involve millions of...more
It depends. A recent decision out of the Federal Circuit tackled this very issue, and the court’s decision strongly suggests that a taking could arise under the right circumstances. (Filler v. U.S. (Fed. Cir. Mar. 10, 2015)...more
The burning question, is why? While this is not the first time the U.S. Supreme Court has ever granted a petition for review in the same case, it is certainly not common. And, it is downright uncommon for the Supreme Court...more
The question now is, is the court’s statement merely a bump in the road or a roadblock? The United States filed the eminent domain action seeking to condemn certain access rights so it could increase its profitability when...more
Contrary to every federal court of appeal decision that has addressed the issue, a federal court in Utah has held that the broad authority of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) to regulate "take" of threatened...more
In a published decision, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District rejected the California Coastal Commission’s (“Commission”) finding that there is no rational nexus or rough proportionality between...more
Just in case you lost track of the Martins Beach saga, here is a quick summary and update. According to reports, a couple of years after billionaire Vinod Khosla bought beachfront property in San Mateo County for over $30...more
Earlier this month, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed a lawsuit brought under section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) because, instead of attacking a specific project or...more
As you may recall, last December we reported on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States, in which the Supreme Court held that government-induced flooding of limited duration may...more
As reported by our colleague Robert Thomas on inversecondemnation.com, the California Supreme Court granted the California Building Industry Association's (CBIA) petition for review in California Building Industry Association...more
When a public agency seeks to impose a land exaction on a planned development, the analysis of whether the proposed dedication meets the necessary "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" tests is often cumbersome and...more
When a public agency seeks to impose a land exaction on a planned development, the analysis of whether the proposed dedication meets the necessary "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" tests is often cumbersome and...more