News & Analysis as of

Property Owners Takings Clause State and Local Government

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

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

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

Perkins Coie

Subway Construction Work Did Not Inversely Condemn Hotel Property

Perkins Coie on

A hotel owner brought a lawsuit against a county transportation authority and a general contractor for nuisance and inverse condemnation alleging that the construction of an underground subway line disrupted the operation of...more

Shutts & Bowen LLP

Amendments to Florida's Private Property Rights Protection Act (“Harris Act”) take effect on October 1, 2021

Shutts & Bowen LLP on

The Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from depriving an owner of private property for public use without “just compensation.” Governmental action burdening private property does not always...more

Perkins Coie

2020 Land Use and Development Case Summaries

Perkins Coie on

Below are summaries of the key California and Ninth Circuit land use and development cases decided in 2020. Each case name is linked to our more extensive discussion of the case on the Land Use & Development Law Report. 1....more

Nossaman LLP

There Can Be No Taking for Impairment of Access If the Property Does Not Abut a Public Road

Nossaman LLP on

We routinely get calls from owners facing impacts to their property or business as a result of construction of a public project or changes in adjacent public streets. For example, the city or county may close a road, create a...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Can State and Local Government Seize Your Private Property During a Global Pandemic?

Hotels, parking lots, convention centers and sports fields throughout the world are being used as field hospitals and to otherwise house people suffering from the effects of COVID-19. For example, one hotel in Hong Kong has...more

Nossaman LLP

Martin's Beach - The Public Taking that Almost Was, and Still May Be

Nossaman LLP on

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

Nossaman LLP

Important New Decision Impacting Legal Issues Motions in California Inverse Condemnation Cases

Nossaman LLP on

As any experienced California eminent domain lawyer knows, there is a unique statutory mechanism that allows parties to bring a legal issues motion to secure a court’s ruling on a litany of issues that impact compensation....more

Miller Starr Regalia

Murr Epilogue: Wisconsin Lawmakers Pass “Homeowners Bill of Rights,” Effectively Reversing Flawed U.S. Supreme Court Decision

Miller Starr Regalia on

Early last summer the U.S. Supreme Court released its long-awaited, and deeply flawed decision in Murr v. Wisconsin, __ U.S. __ (2017). We wrote about this unfortunate new takings case here and in “Missed Opportunity In...more

Nossaman LLP

Supreme Court Develops New Multifactor Balancing Test to Determine What Constitutes a “Larger Parcel” in Regulatory Takings Cases

Nossaman LLP on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Establishes New Test for Evaluating Property Rights Under the Takings Clause

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Redefining the Denominator: Supreme Court Adopts New Test in Regulatory Taking Case 

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

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court: State Law Merging Lots in Common Ownership Not a Regulatory Taking

Holland & Knight LLP on

In an interesting twist, eight members of the U.S. Supreme Court agreed on June 23, 2017, in the case of Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, that state regulations making two adjoining lots held in common ownership into a single...more

16 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide