County of Hawaii v. C&J Coupe Family Ltd. P'ship

Brief for the Appellant Replying to Answering Brief of Appellee 1250 Oceanside Partners

more+
less-

When is an exercise of eminent domain not "for public use" as required by the U.S. and state constitutions? This brief, and the briefs filed earlier in the appeal, address that issue.

These cases have resulted in two prior reported opinions, County of Hawaii v. C & J Coupe Family Ltd. P’ship, 119 Haw. 352, 198 P.3d 615 (2008), which deals with the issue of pretext and public purpose in eminent domain, and County of Hawaii v. C & J Coupe Family Ltd. P’ship, 120 Haw. 400, 208 P.3d 713 (2009), which held that under Hawaii law, the condemnor must pay 100% of the property owners damages if a taking is dismissed or otherwise fails.

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

Published In: Civil Rights Updates, Constitutional Law Updates, Residential Real Estate Updates, Zoning, Planning & Land Use Updates

Reference Info:Appellate Brief | State, 9th Circuit, Hawaii | 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 »