News & Analysis as of

Property Owners Takings Clause

Gray Reed

Limitations and Standing to Sue Dry Up Landowners’ Claim to Texas Riverbed

Gray Reed on

State of Texas. V. Reimer et al. studied lawyer-nerdy questions of standing to bring a lawsuit and statutes of limitations as applied to inverse condemnation suits.  Spoiler alert: To the chagrin of the landowners, waiting...more

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: Supreme Court Won’t Be Taking on This Takings Case

Jenner & Block on

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

Frost Brown Todd

Short-Term Rental Bans Are Back in the Takings Spotlight

Frost Brown Todd on

The U. S. District Court for the North District of Illinois recently enjoined the Village of Glen Ellyn from enforcing its short-term rental ban. The court granted a request for a temporary restraining order, which...more

Cranfill Sumner LLP

Understanding Attorney’s Fees and Costs Reimbursement in North Carolina Land Condemnation Cases

Cranfill Sumner LLP on

It is one of the most common assumptions made by clients in litigation: “If I win, the other side will have to pay my attorney’s fees, right?” Unfortunately, that assumption is often wrong—especially in North Carolina. The...more

Nossaman LLP

Inverse Condemnation Liability Does Not Extend to Failure to Prevent Actions of Another Party

Nossaman LLP on

Can a public entity be held liable for inverse condemnation when it fails to prevent another party from causing damage to private property?  This one is pretty simple:  the answer is no....more

Snell & Wilmer

Tenth Circuit Revives Takings Claims for Public Use of Property Held Under the State’s Unclaimed Property Act

Snell & Wilmer on

In a decision that may reshape how states administer their unclaimed property statutes, the Tenth Circuit held that property owners can pursue takings claims against the Colorado State Treasurer (Treasurer) without exhausting...more

MG+M The Law Firm

Schaap v. United States: PFAS Litigation Continues to Evolve with Novel Takings Clause Claim

MG+M The Law Firm on

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) litigation is rapidly becoming one of the most dynamic and evolving areas of environmental law. With thousands of cases consolidated in the Aqueous Film-Forming Foams (AFFF)...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Land banking after Tyler: No government taking where there’s a process (so says federal 6th Cir.)

Bricker Graydon LLP on

Land banking advocates across the country took notice of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Tyler v. Hennepin County that found a “government taking” occurred when a Minnesota county sold a tax-foreclosed home to recover...more

Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti PC

Businesses Shuttered by COVID-19 Lockdowns Seek Supreme Court’s Revision of Modern Takings Law

Is a business temporarily closed by order of the government entitled to compensation? Two groups of plaintiffs have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court hoping not just for a “yes” but an overhaul of a half-century of regulatory...more

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP

Reacting to Tyler v. Hennepin County: West Virginia Federal Court Allows Wood County Tax-Sale Challenge to Proceed

Earlier this month, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia declined to dismiss a Section 1983 challenge against a West Virginia County in Grady v. Wood County. This ruling comes in the wake of the...more

Miller Starr Regalia

Sheetz v. El Dorado County: Death Knell for Development Fee Programs or Harbinger of Judicial Deference?

Miller Starr Regalia on

The United States Supreme Court’s most recent Takings case, Sheetz v. El Dorado County, California enunciated a seemingly simple holding, that legislatively-imposed development fees are not, as such, exempt from analysis...more

Nossaman LLP

Development Plans and Permitting Efforts Help Ripen Regulatory Takings Claims

Nossaman LLP on

Investors and developers scour the Southern California real estate market searching for opportunities to buy dated houses that they can demolish and replace with large, modern homes to sell for much more.  A few individuals...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

Roetzel & Andress

Ohio Court Defines When Property Owner in Eminent Domain Case Can Pursue Appeal

Roetzel & Andress on

For the past several years, the hot topic in Ohio eminent domain law has been the ability of a property owner to challenge a taking based on whether it is necessary for a public purpose, or if the appropriating authority...more

Roetzel & Andress

Ohio Court Rules Property Owner Can Recover Attorney Fees When Eminent Domain Case Is Dismissed by the Taking Authority

Roetzel & Andress on

In the case of N. Ridgeville v. Zilka, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 23CA012047, 2024-Ohio-2468, Ohio’s Ninth District Court of Appeals addressed the ability of a property owner in an eminent domain action to recover attorney fees...more

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: Federal Circuit Issues Important Takings Decision on Eviction Moratorium

Jenner & Block on

In a significant Takings Clause opinion, Darby Development Company, Inc. v. United States, the Federal Circuit sided with landlords who argued that the CDC’s eviction moratorium constituted a physical taking of their...more

DarrowEverett LLP

Land Use Challenges Showcase What’s There for the ‘Taking’

DarrowEverett LLP on

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

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Supreme Court Impact Fee Decision Creates Opportunities for Developers and Property Owners

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that may significantly affect how development impact fees are assessed in California. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the Court unanimously held that...more

Stoel Rives -  Ahead of Schedule

The United States Supreme Court Determines There Is No Distinction Between Legislative and Administrative Takings

In a typical permitting process, the local government may place certain conditions on issuing a building permit to further a legitimate public purpose.  While the local government has “substantial authority to regulate land...more

Oliva Gibbs

Third Time’s a Charm: Ohio Supreme Court Remands Case for Failing to Follow Instructions

Oliva Gibbs on

In August 2016, AWMS Water Solutions, L.L.C., AWMS Holdings L.L.C., and AWMS Rt. 169, L.L.C. (collectively, “Appellants”) filed their original writ of mandamus to commence property-appropriation proceedings since, in their...more

Downey Brand LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Legislatively-imposed Permit Conditions Must Satisfy the ‘Essential Nexus’ and ‘Rough...

Downey Brand LLP on

In a highly-anticipated case revolving around development impact fees, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, 144 S.Ct. 893 (2024) that legislatively-imposed conditions on building permits...more

Cozen O'Connor

U.S. Supreme Court Revisits the Right of Local Government to Exact Permit Conditions from Developers

Cozen O'Connor on

The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has again rejected a state's narrow interpretation of the constitutional limits on government's ability to impose development conditions. A unanimous SCOTUS ruled on April 12 in favor of the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

What the Sheetz: Where California Development Impact Fees Stand Following Recent Supreme Court Decision

Undoubtedly, development impact fees (DIFs) can make or break the pro forma of any development project. Until this month, developers hoping to challenge the assessment of project-related DIFs were often limited in the causes...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

US Supreme Court Decision Invites Scrutiny of Legislatively Imposed Impact Fees

Latham & Watkins LLP on

The unanimous opinion holds that development impact fees established through the legislative process are subject to constitutional scrutiny as potential regulatory takings. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the...more

Rosenberg Martin Greenberg LLP

Supreme Court Leaves the Sheetz Out In Takings Case

When the government wants to take private property for a public project, it must compensate the owner at fair market value. The just compensation concept comes from the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which provides: “nor...more

224 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 9

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide