Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida Dep't of Environmental Protection

Brief Amicus Curiae of Owners' Counsel of America in Support of Petitioners

more+
less-

Do judges "make law?"

That issue was at the forefront in the recent confirmation hearings for Justice Sonia Sotomayor. While asked the question -- she -- like SCOTUS nominees before her, politely sidestepped the question.

In Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc. v. Florida De['t of Environmental Protection, No. 08-1151 (cert. granted June 15, 2009), the U.S. Supreme Court will be facing that question squarely. The case asks whether courts are capable of taking property when they make law and change long-standing rules, or ignore their own precedents.

The Florida Supreme Court held that a state statute which prohibits "beach renourishment" without a permit did not effect a taking of littoral (beachfront) property, even though it altered the long-standing rights of the owners to accretion on their land and direct access to the ocean. The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether the Florida court's reversal of more than 100 years of Florida law was a judicial taking, and whether the Florida court's decision violated due process.

The amicus brief of Owners' Counsel, a nationwide association of the most experienced eminent domain and property lawyers, addresses three issues.

First, the notion of "property" embodies core components transcending a state court's power to redefine. The rule of accretion, which insures that littoral parcels remain so, is one of those fundamental components.

Second, the remedy for a judicial taking is invalidation of the state court judgment.

Third, the brief summarizes several of the more notable instances where state courts have openly and notoriously rewritten established rules of property. This was accomplished under the guise of "correcting" errors in long-standing common law doctrines, reinterpreting terms to alter their commonly understood meanings, or "discovering" that private property is (and has been all along) subject to a public trust.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

Published In:

Reference Info:Appellate Brief | Federal, U.S. Supreme Court | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Robert Thomas, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×
Loading...
×
×