Breaking the Cycle: Flooding, Infrastructure, and Climate Law in Practice
From Permits to Penalties: A Deep Dive Into Coastal Development Law
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 170: Listen and Learn -- Real Property Zoning Rules
[Webinar] Cannabis Real Estate Considerations
On-Demand Webinar | Linear Infrastructure Redux: Adapting Your Projects to Meet the New Regulatory Climate
Law Brief: Your Ad Here: Outdoor Advertising and the Law
How Florida Zoning Regulations Can Encourage Development and Climate Change Resiliency
Transit-Oriented Development in the 305
Homeless Assistance Centers and the NIMBY Response
Religious Use Law in South Florida
Rapid Transit Zones in Miami-Dade County
Real Estate Developer Rights When Cities Demand Too Much
Jones Day Talks: Developments in Germany's Wind Power Regulations
[WEBINAR] Planning in the Coastal Zone
[WEBINAR] Creating an Accessible City
Won’t You Be My Neighbor?
29 Greenwood, LLC v. City of Newton, 128 F.4th 1 (1st Cir. 2025) In 29 Greenwood, the Newton Historical Commission (the “Commission”) issued a permit to 29 Greenwood, LLC (“Greenwood”) for restoration of the Gershom Hyde...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 city of Berkeley will pay $4 million in connection with its mishandling of an application to build 260 housing units on the old Spenger's parking lot. Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch fined Berkeley $2.6...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
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
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
Real Property Update - US Supreme Court - Regulatory Taking: owner of parcel A, that took title to adjacent parcel B after regulation restricting use of parcels had been passed, lost grandfather rights for both parcels by...more
The Supreme Court of the United States applied a multi-factor test to rule that a regulation prohibiting construction on an undersized lot contiguous to a second lot under common ownership was not a taking. In the broadest...more
The US Supreme Court today issued its latest pronouncement on regulatory takings, Murr et. al, v. Wisconsin, et al. Justice Kennedy wrote for the Court, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan. The issue was...more
One issue that can arise in eminent domain actions involving undeveloped (or under developed) property is whether the property being acquired is potentially subject to a dedication requirement. If the property’s overall...more