5 Key Takeaways | Making Sense of §102 Public Use and On Sale Bars to Patentability
Eminent Domain: First Principles, Kelo, and In Service of Infrastructure Buildout
Newsflash: Rockweed Not a Fish
The Ohio and U.S. Constitutions require that the power of eminent domain can only be exercised when necessary for a public use. In the 2005 case of Kelo v. City of New London, the U.S. Supreme Court took an expansive view...more
Ending four years of litigation in consolidated cases filed by the Nahant Preservation Trust, Inc. (“Nahant”) and Northeastern University (“Northeastern” or “the University”), the Massachusetts Appeals Court determined that...more
The construction of a bike path ran into a bump in the road when the Mill Creek Metropolitan Park District (Park District) attempted to take land through eminent domain. The Park District is a public entity that is attempting...more
Some might argue that challenging the necessity of an appropriation involving a public utility or common carrier is a futile act, given the presumption of the necessity under R.C. 163.09(B)(1)(c). In State ex rel. Bohlen v....more
A New York Appellate Court (Fourth Department) (“Court”) addressed in a November 8th Order an action filed by a potential purchaser of a 50 acre parcel of property against the Town of Carroll, New York alleging a taking...more
On November 25, 2019, the California Court of Appeal ruled that the public’s use of a road for more than half a century to access Martin’s Beach was permissive, and therefore “did not ripen into a public dedication that would...more
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
This Fall, the California Coastal Commission (“Commission”) was handed down two significant victories, further cementing its authority and jurisdiction within California coastal zones. These cases demonstrate that, in certain...more