In That Case: Department of State v. Muñoz
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 418: Listen and Learn -- Criminal Procedure: Miranda Warnings
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 19 - The Fifth Amendment & Its Role in Parallel Proceedings
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 323: Listen and Learn -- The Exclusionary Rule (Criminal Law and Procedure)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 157: Listen and Learn -- The Sixth Amendment
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 154: Listen and Learn -- The Exclusionary Rule (Criminal Law and Procedure)
Eminent Domain: First Principles, Kelo, and In Service of Infrastructure Buildout
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 140: Listen and Learn -- Regulatory Takings
#WorkforceWednesday: Mandatory Vaccination, Tipped Worker Rule, and SCOTUS Rules Against Organized Labor - Employment Law This Week®
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 290: Listen and Learn -- Privilege Against Self-Incrimination and Miranda Rights
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 128: Listen and Learn -- Privilege Against Self-Incrimination and Miranda Rights
More Emerging Litigation Claims and Demands from COVID-19
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 79: Tackling an MEE Criminal Law/Procedure and Evidence Essay
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 70: Tackling a California Bar Exam Essay: Criminal Law and Procedure
Podcast - Developments in FDA & DOJ Regulation and Enforcement of Manufacturer Communications
The Koontz Decision: Limits Conditions a Government can Impose on Developers
Supreme Court Hands Landowners a Major Victory - Nossaman's Brad Kuhn
How Does Immunity Work in a Federal Criminal Case?
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
In a typical permitting process, the local government may place certain conditions on issuing a building permit to further a legitimate public purpose. While the local government has “substantial authority to regulate land...more
The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has again rejected a state's narrow interpretation of the constitutional limits on government's ability to impose development conditions. A unanimous SCOTUS ruled on April 12 in favor of the...more
Undoubtedly, development impact fees (DIFs) can make or break the pro forma of any development project. Until this month, developers hoping to challenge the assessment of project-related DIFs were often limited in the causes...more
The unanimous opinion holds that development impact fees established through the legislative process are subject to constitutional scrutiny as potential regulatory takings. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the...more
When the government wants to take private property for a public project, it must compensate the owner at fair market value. The just compensation concept comes from the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which provides: “nor...more
Last week, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, in which the Court held that for the purpose of a takings claim there is no distinction in whether permit conditions...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued two decisions on Tuesday, April 16: Rudisill v. McDonough, No. 22-888: This case concerns the interaction between two federal statutes providing up to 36 months of...more
The Sheetz v. County of El Dorado decision will create uncertainty in California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and many other states as cities, counties, developers and property owners reexamine whether existing impact fee...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) held that the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land‑use permit conditions. Building permit...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 12, 2024, that the "Takings Clause" enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies equally to legislative and administratively imposed land use permitting fees. Since...more
On April 12, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sheetz v. Cnty. Of El Dorado, California, 22-1074 (U.S. Apr. 12, 2024) and unanimously held that legislative actions can still be unconstitutional exactions...more
On April 16, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided DeVillier v. Texas, No. 22-913, holding that owners of property north of U.S. Interstate Highway 10 adversely affected by the flood evacuation barrier constructed by Texas...more
On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated ruling in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, U.S. No. 22-1074 (petition for certiorari granted 9/29/23) (Sheetz). The case concerned the...more
B&D is pleased to present the next installment of our 2024 Litigation Look Ahead series. (Read part three covering administrative enforcement issues here.) In this edition, our litigation team examines two Fifth Amendment...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 Rhode Island, public access advocates, as well as local and state officials, continue efforts to secure access for the public to and along the shore. My August post, “How About a Walk on the Beach,” summarized the history...more
The Right of Way Consultant’s Council Membership Meeting took place in Downtown Las Vegas on November 3, 2023. Having previously presented an eminent domain topic at the 2022 Membership Meeting, Steven Silva from Nossaman’s...more
When George Sheetz planned to build an 1800-square-foot manufactured home on his California property, he could hardly have thought his routine permit request would end up at the U.S. Supreme Court. But when the County of El...more
The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari on September 29, 2023 in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, a case that challenges the County of El Dorado’s requirement that a property owner pay a Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee...more
August. Dog days of summer. And also the best time to take a relaxing stroll along the beach. But where? Public beaches are often still crammed if you can find a place to park. But many of us know of a public access path to...more
Summary - In Tyler v. Hennepin County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that a county’s retention of the excess value of a home in a tax sale violated the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The decision, which...more
On May 25, 2023, the United States Supreme Court, in Tyler v. Hennepin County, ruled it is unconstitutional for municipalities to unilaterally retain the surplus monies generated from tax lien foreclosure sales. More...more
With essential unanimity, though with an array of concurrences in one of them, the Supreme Court ruled against government parties in three cases, two of them in favor of homeowners, and in property rights and environmental...more
UNITED STATES UPDATES - California - Today’s IV, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2022 Cal.App. LEXIS 840 (2022 WL 5107251) - Facts: A property owner who owned a hotel in Los...more