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?
In 2024, in what was heralded as a big win for developers in California, the U.S. Supreme Court upended decades of California precedent and held that legislatively enacted development impact fees must satisfy the “essential...more
Sullivan's Permitting & Land Use Practice Group and Litigation Department have released the second issue of their Zoning and Development Newsletter. The publication aims to provide our firm's clients and others interested...more
Last week we wrote about a United States Supreme Court case Murr v. Wisconsin and its impact locally. Since that post, the Petitioner, Donna Murr contacted the author to provide us with an update to her family’s situation....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