News & Analysis as of

Common Ownership

Supreme Court Develops New Multifactor Balancing Test to Determine What Constitutes a “Larger Parcel” in Regulatory Takings Cases

by Nossaman LLP on

Last week, the United States Supreme Court in Murr v. Wisconsin issued a key regulatory takings decision which creates a new multifactor balancing test to determine whether two adjacent properties with single ownership could...more

U.S. Supreme Court Establishes New Test for Evaluating Property Rights Under the Takings Clause

by Holland & Knight LLP on

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

SCOTUS Establishes a New Three-Part Test To Determine the “Whole Parcel” in Regulatory Takings Cases

by Locke Lord LLP on

Property owners who allege a regulatory taking will now need to analyze their holdings against a new, fact-specific, three-factor standard announced by the U.S. Supreme Court to determine what constitutes the owners’ “whole...more

SCOTUS Announces New Multi-Factor Test to Determine the Relevant Parcel in Regulatory Takings Cases

by Miller Starr Regalia on

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

Murr Decision Makes Takings Law Murkier

Murr v. Wisconsin (June 23, 2017, Docket No. 15-214) - Why It Matters: The Supreme Court missed an opportunity to bring some clarity to the law of regulatory takings and, instead, made the law more confusing and less...more

Redefining the Denominator: Supreme Court Adopts New Test in Regulatory Taking Case 

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

The Supreme Court Makes a Mess of Takings Law

by Beveridge & Diamond PC on

On June 23, the Supreme Court finally addressed directly the frequently posed question: When considering the claimed taking of a property interest by government regulation, what is the affected property to be considered? All...more

U.S. Supreme Court: State Law Merging Lots in Common Ownership Not a Regulatory Taking

by Holland & Knight LLP on

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 & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending June 16 & 23, 2017

by Carlton Fields on

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

U.S. Supreme Court issues 5th Amendment Takings Claim Decision

by Saul Ewing LLP on

?On June 23, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated ruling in Murr v. Wisconsin, a takings case that may have important consequences for property owners owning multiple contiguous parcels. The Court held that...more

SCOTUS Rejects Dueling Bright Line Tests to Identify Property at Issue in Regulatory Takings Cases

by Clark Hill PLC on

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

Supreme Court Decides Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214.

by Faegre Baker Daniels on

On June 23, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214, holding that, in determining whether a regulatory taking has occurred under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, courts should...more

New Requirements Under MCIOA: Preventative Maintenance Plans and Construction Defect Claims

by Hellmuth & Johnson PLLC on

Important changes to Minnesota law were recently made that will affect real estate developers, builders, associations and unit owners. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 515B, the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act (“MCIOA”),...more

When do related companies get combined for purposes of FMLA?

by Nexsen Pruet, PLLC on

Consider this example: Company A has 30 employees in Greenville and Company B has 30 employees in Spartanburg. Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) analysis is easy, right? Neither company has 50 employees, and, therefore,...more

Minority shareholdings: New competition law issues?

by Dentons on

New competition law issues with respect to minority shareholdings? A topic that recently became prominent in the competition law community and beyond is whether so-called “common ownership” may have a negative effect on...more

Mandatory Training for Community Association Board Members

by Ballard Spahr LLP on

Following the release of a report evaluating the Montgomery County Commission on Common Ownership Communities, the Montgomery County Council in Maryland enacted legislation that requires training and certification for board...more

Under Construction - March 2015

by Snell & Wilmer on

Welcome to the spring edition of our Under Construction newsletter. There have been some interesting legal changes that have taken place recently with the potential to significantly impact the construction...more

CFTC Re-Proposes Position Limits Rule and Proposes Revised Aggregation Requirements

by Latham & Watkins LLP on

The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), on November 5, 2013, re- proposed a rulemaking (the Re-­Proposed Rule) that would establish specific limits on speculative positions in 28 physical commodity futures and...more

Who is a Large Employer Under Obamacare?

by Cole Schotz on

Among other things, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Act”), commonly referred to as Obamacare, requires “large employers” to provide qualified health coverage for all of their full-time employees, or pay...more

Third Circuit Addresses Insured Status for Lessor of Commercial Auto

In its recent decision in Koons v. XL Insurance Company, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5870 (3d. Cir. Mar. 25, 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, applying Pennsylvania law, had occasion to consider...more

Federal Circuit Finds Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Without Common Ownership

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

Obviousness-type double patenting usually arises between commonly-owned patents or patent applications. While the USPTO has interpreted the judicially-created doctrine as pertaining when there is common or overlapping...more

Physician Payment Sunshine Rule is Finalized

by Baker Donelson on

The Final Rule implementing the Physician Payment Sunshine Act was announced on February 1st and published in the Federal Register on February 8th. The Final Rule establishes procedures for drug and device manufacturers to...more

CMS Issues Final Physician Payment Sunshine Act Regulations

by Perkins Coie on

On February 1, 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published the long-awaited final regulations implementing the Physician Payment Sunshine Act (Act or Sunshine Act). The Sunshine Act requires drug,...more

23 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*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. Or, sign up using your email address.