News & Analysis as of

Property Owners › Eminent Domain › Land Parcels

Ackerman & Ackerman, P.C.

Condemnation of Property Left Without Value or Utility: Total Takings Under Remnant Property Statutes

Ackerman & Ackerman, P.C. on

A central issue going to both the valuation of damages and the extent of a taking in eminent domain cases is whether the government or utility is required to take an entire parcel, beyond just a portion that may be required...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

PA Supreme Court Clarifies Land Valuation Rules in Pignetti v. PennDOT

Ballard Spahr LLP on

In a significant victory for property owners in Pignetti v. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has relaxed the standard for establishing that two noncontiguous parcels of...more

Winstead PC

Come & Take It: The Eminent Domain Podcast (Episode #13), Featuring Winstead Shareholder Tom Forestier

Winstead PC on

Tune in to the latest episode of "Come and Take It: The Eminent Domain Podcast." Host Bobby Debelak sits down with Winstead Shareholder Thomas J. Forestier, a leading infrastructure and eminent domain attorney with 37+ years...more

Nossaman LLP

Arizona Court of Appeals Holds Severance Damages Unavailable for Homeowners Whose Easements were Extinguished in Eminent Domain

Nossaman LLP on

The Arizona Court of Appeals recently held that members of a homeowners’ association are not entitled to severance damages to their residential parcels when common areas are condemned....more

Nossaman LLP

What Constitutes a “Larger Parcel?”

Nossaman LLP on

In California, a fundamental principle of eminent domain law is that an owner of property acquired by eminent domain is entitled to just compensation for the property interests taken (Code Civ. Proc. §1263.010)....more

Farrell Fritz, P.C.

Property Owner’s Request for Court-Determined Just Compensation Backfires

Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

The facts at issue in Elpa Builders, Inc. v. State of New York are relatively straightforward.  The property owner (the “Owner”) owned a 53,645-square-foot parcel of property (the “Property”) along New York State Route 347...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

SCOTUS Will Not Hear FL Eminent Domain Case

Fox Rothschild LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition to hear a developer’s case against the Florida Department of Environmental Protection over a permit denial for a beachfront parcel. The case relates to a DEP denial of a final permit...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Murr v. Wisconsin: Defining the Property Affected by a Regulatory Taking

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC on

The Supreme Court of the United States recently decided the case Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214 (June 23, 2017), which laid out a new test for determining whether separate parcels of land should be evaluated as a single parcel...more

Stinson LLP

U.S. Supreme Court to Decide "Critical Question" in Eminent Domain

Stinson LLP on

This summer, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a critical question that will determine whether some landowners will receive compensation from regulations that restrict the uses of their land. The case, Murr v. Wisconsin, may...more

Stinson LLP

U.S. Supreme Court to Decide "Critical Question" in Eminent Domain

Stinson LLP on

This summer, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a critical question that will determine whether some landowners will receive compensation for regulations that restrict the uses of their land. The case, Murr v. Wisconsin, may...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide