State AG Pulse | An Early Peek At the 2026 State AG Elections
Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Solicitors General Insights: The Tale of Two Washingtons — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Cannabis Law Now Podcast - Cannabis in the Show Me State: An Interview with BeLeaf Medical's Mitch Meyers
Nonprofit Quick Tip: State Filings in Maryland and Pennsylvania
State AG Pulse | A FAIR Go For NY Consumers
Navigating Renewable Energy: Insights from the ACP Siting and Permitting Conference - Energy Law Insights
New Executive Order Targets Disparate Impact Claims Nationwide - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Project Catalyst: An Economic Development Podcast | Episode 14: Shaping North Carolina’s Economic Future with Secretary of Commerce Lee Lilley
Nonprofit Quick Tip: State Filings in Virginia and West Virginia
ESG Essentials: What You Need To Know Now - Episode 19 - Power Struggles: Federal vs. State Authority in Energy Law
Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez – Innovative Approach to Safety
Business Better Podcast Episode - Manufacturing Moment: How State Associations Navigate the Policy Landscape
CHPS Podcast Episode 2: Bitcoin in the Halls of Power
AGG Talks: Development Podcast Series - Episode 1: Powering Georgia: Energy Resilience, Data Centers, and Clean Innovation
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 229: Public Health in South Carolina with Dr. Edward Simmer of SC Dept of Public Health
Nonprofit Quick Tip: State Filings in South Dakota and North Dakota
Bridging the Gap: How CivicReach is Revolutionizing Government Customer Service
Project Catalyst: An Economic Development Podcast | Episode 13: Economic Development in Rural Alabama with Valerie Gray and Lori Huguley of VaLor Strategies
Nonprofit Quick Tip: State Filings in Wisconsin and Minnesota
On July 16, 2025, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state’s charity care requirement—which mandates that hospitals must treat patients regardless of their ability to pay—does not amount to...more
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
Condemning agencies contemplating the use of eminent domain at times hire third-party acquisition agents to purchase properties ahead of an incoming infrastructure project without the provision of written good faith offers....more
When the government exercises its power of eminent domain to take private property for public use, the U.S. Constitution requires it to provide “just compensation” to the property owner. But what does “just compensation”...more
In a significant victory for property owners, the Arizona Supreme Court held this week that damages in condemnation cases can include compensation for the reduction in value caused by the proximity of homes to a new highway...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
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
In my last blog, I wrote about the shortcomings of compensating displaced property owners based on the ‘objective’ standard of the market value of their property. That standard ignores the owners’ ‘subjective’ losses, such...more
When we take on an eminent domain case, our primary goal is to put our client in the best position possible. In some cases, that means fighting the taking itself, as my dad (and boss) did in the well-known Wayne County v....more
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
Following the death of George Floyd during his arrest in Minneapolis, Minnesota, America experienced months of civil unrest throughout the country. It was during these protests that some began to assert that civil society in...more
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
Welcome to 2020! It is a new year and with every new year, comes a lot of new: new goals, new diet, new workout routines that leave every part of you sore... In the professional setting, a new year brings a lot of “chores,”...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
Ninth Circuit Determines City Did Not Have to Return guns to Wife Because Husband Posed Threat - A city’s ability to protect public safety by preventing dangerous individuals from accessing firearms was affirmed last week...more
In an eminent domain proceeding, the property owner and the condemning agency each typically introduce evidence of just compensation through valuation experts. The jury is then required to render a verdict in between the...more
Like the vast majority of general civil litigation, eminent domain matters usually settle before going to trial. The resolution is typically documented in either a stipulated judgment or a settlement agreement. ...more
Early this year, the Supreme Court of New York, Richmond County issued a comprehensive opinion in Galarza v. City of New York, 58 Misc.3d 1210(A), reaffirming and clarifying the nuances of condemnation, takings and just...more
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
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
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
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