Tenant Tales and Reseller Realities: Inside the FCRA Arena With Eric Ellman — FCRA Focus Podcast
REFRESH Real Estate Leasing Tips for Nonprofits
Arrendamientos de corto plazo, una realidad en Colombia
Come & Take It: The Eminent Domain Podcast (Episode #13), Featuring Winstead Shareholder Tom Forestier
Once Removed Episode 10: Trustee Removal and Case Update on Leo Kahn Revocable Trust
Red Hot Apartment Investment Market Starts to Cool
State Land Use Board Weighs in on Oregon Coast Fight Over Short Term Rentals
Developing Philly: The State of Philadelphia's Tax Abatements in 2022
Title Insurance and Your Transaction
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 319: Listen and Learn -- Negligence: Duties of Landlords, Owners, and Possessors of Land
Law Brief®: Robert Wolf, Alexander Tiktin and Richard Schoenstein Discuss the Continuing Foreclosure/Eviction Moratorium
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 149: Listen and Learn -- Negligence: Duties of Landlords, Owners, and Possessors of Land
Eminent Domain: First Principles, Kelo, and In Service of Infrastructure Buildout
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 310: Listen and Learn -- Adverse Possession
Managing Apartment Turnover: From Launch to $10M Series A, with Rent Ready's Jonathan Kite
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 144: Listen and Learn -- Adverse Possession
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 305: Listen and Learn -- Property Crimes
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 140: Listen and Learn -- Regulatory Takings
On-Demand Webinar | Living on the Edge: Managing Sea Level Rise in California
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 122: Listen and Learn -- Easements (Real Property)
On June 30, the Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari in GHP Management Corporation v. City of Los Angeles. The case arose out of a COVID-era eviction moratorium enacted by the City of Los Angeles which...more
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that “No person shall be… deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just...more
UNITED STATES UPDATES - California - Today’s IV, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2022 Cal.App. LEXIS 840 (2022 WL 5107251) - Facts: A property owner who owned a hotel in Los...more
According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the answer is a definitive yes....more
As we have previously discussed, downzoning (changing the zoning designation for property from a more intensive use to a more restrictive use) can possibly rise to the level of a regulatory taking, depending on each...more
The Township of Canton, Michigan, like many local governments, requires property owners who remove trees of a certain size to either replace those trees or pay into a fund for the planting of new trees. The Sixth Circuit...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
Welcome back to the Bar Exam Toolbox podcast! In today's episode from our "Listen and Learn" series, we tackle the topic of regulatory takings, which is often tested in crossover essay questions that cover both Property and...more
The Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (No. 20-107), a case that has generated considerable amicus participation and press coverage. In that case, union organizers, relying on a...more
What are a government’s risks when they deem a business not “essential” and require it to cease operations? Are such Emergency Orders effectively a “taking” of the business? And if so, will the governmental authority be...more
With the recent government mandates surrounding COVID-19, many businesses are completely shut down and are legally unable to open their doors to the public. ...more
Last year, the United States Supreme Court made headlines (at least in our eminent domain world) by issuing a ruling in Knick v. Township of Scott that property owners can bypass the state courts and directly file a Fifth...more
When a local government agency impermissibly “spot zones” a property, thereby depriving it of all economically beneficial uses, can the property owner seek to invalidate that zoning decision, or is the owner left with a claim...more
City governments’ broad powers to enforce rent control and other regulations — even if that results in lower profits for landlords — were reinforced in a recent opinion from the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. ...more
When state and local governments impose unreasonable conditions or exactions on private property, owners pursuing a regulatory takings claim often face a maze of procedural obstacles just to have their case heard. ...more
On March 5, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Knick v. Township of Scott (Case No. 17-647) to address the requirement, established in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S....more
The stakes could not be higher; would the property yield one or two waterfront building lots? On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States decided a case that involved the merger of two parcels of property...more
A fundamental precept of American law is the authority of the government, in the exercise of the police power for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to regulate the conduct of individuals in the...more
Balancing the interests of the Federal Government as owner of thousands of acres surrounding Crooked Lake and private owners’ rights, on July 26, in a 2 to 1 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that...more
Last week, the United States Supreme Court in Murr v. Wisconsin issued a key regulatory takings decision which creates a new multifactor balancing test to determine whether two adjacent properties with single ownership could...more
In Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, 2017 WL 2694699 (U.S.S.C. June 23, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court, in a majority opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy, addressed "one of the critical questions" in the law of regulatory takings:...more
Property owners who allege a regulatory taking will now need to analyze their holdings against a new, fact-specific, three-factor standard announced by the U.S. Supreme Court to determine what constitutes the owners’ “whole...more
On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States finally decided Murr v. Wisconsin, __ U.S. __ (2017) (Case No. 15-214), a case that addressed land use regulations that “merged” adjacent parcels (the first of which...more
In Murr v. Wisconsin, the US Supreme Court declined to find that a landowner's riverfront property was the subject of a regulatory taking. In a 5-3 decision, the majority adopted a new test for defining the bounds of the...more
On June 23, the Supreme Court finally addressed directly the frequently posed question: When considering the claimed taking of a property interest by government regulation, what is the affected property to be considered? All...more