News & Analysis as of

Land Owners Takings Clause

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Rules in Favor of Landowners in Eminent Domain Claim

On August 20, 2024, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania issued a ruling in Wolfe v. Reading Blue Mountain & Northern RR Co. The Court overturned the Commonwealth Court’s determination that a condemnation of private land by a...more

Oliva Gibbs LLP

Third Time’s a Charm: Ohio Supreme Court Remands Case for Failing to Follow Instructions

Oliva Gibbs LLP on

In August 2016, AWMS Water Solutions, L.L.C., AWMS Holdings L.L.C., and AWMS Rt. 169, L.L.C. (collectively, “Appellants”) filed their original writ of mandamus to commence property-appropriation proceedings since, in their...more

Nossaman LLP

State Inverse Condemnation Remedy Sufficient To Vindicate Constitutional Rights

Nossaman LLP on

Dodge, duck, dip, dive, and… dodge.  An interesting case from the United States Supreme Court yesterday.  Interesting because of what it says, and interesting because of what it very explicitly declined to say....more

Saul Ewing LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Decides Two Takings Cases in One Week

Saul Ewing LLP on

It is rare for the Supreme Court to decide cases involving the Constitution’s Takings Clause, and, indeed, not uncommon for the Court to go years without considering the Clause at all; so, when the Court issues two decisions...more

Allen Matkins

U.S. Supreme Court Will Clarify the Constitutionality of Legislatively-Authorized Land Use Exaction Fees

Allen Matkins on

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

Perkins Coie

Plaintiff Not Required to Submit Multiple Development Applications Before Bringing Takings Claim

Perkins Coie on

Multiple applications for a development project are not required where the first permit denial makes clear that no development of the property would be allowed under any circumstance. Felkay v. City of Santa Barbara, No....more

Miller Starr Regalia

Santa Barbara Liable for Taking Private Property When its Permit Denial Made Clear no Development Would be Allowed

Miller Starr Regalia on

In a case that exists only because of the choices a city made in both application decision-making and litigation, the Second District Court of Appeal held, in Felkay v. City of Santa Barbara, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2021), that...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Stages of an Eminent Domain or Condemnation Case in Minnesota

For landowners, learning that the government intends to take their property is always a rude awakening. After receiving notice that the government seeks to acquire a piece of land, the landowner sets off on a difficult...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

I-69 Section 6: Will the $1.5 Billion Roadway Impact Your Property?

Construction of Interstate 69 in Indiana seems never-ending. New sections of the interstate have already been completed from Evansville, Indiana to Martinsville, Indiana. Section 6 of the project is just beginning, and it...more

Miller Starr Regalia

Caltrans’ Acceptance of Offer of Dedication by Physical Occupation Does Not Lead to Takings Liability

Miller Starr Regalia on

Takings cases involving transportation agencies such as Caltrans typically involve physical occupations of land under the law of eminent domain. In a twist on such physical occupation, in a case originally filed on December...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

Ohio Supreme Court denies writ of mandamus in dispute involving ODNR

Bricker Graydon LLP on

The Supreme Court of Ohio on January 30, 2018 issued an opinion in State ex rel. Kerns v. Simmers, Slip Opinion No. 2018-Ohio-256, denying a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the Chief of the Ohio Department of Natural...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Leftover Land? When the Government Takes Part of Your Property, What Happens to the Rest?

So many questions arise when a landowner finds out that a government entity intends to condemn his or her property. When? Why? How will I get compensated? What can I do to protect my rights? There are even more uncertainties...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Border Wall Battles - Can you fight the government’s efforts to take land for the border wall, and how much compensation can you...

Landowners along the border of the United States and Mexico may soon face fast-tracked efforts by the federal government to condemn easements and, in many cases, substantial portions of their land outright through eminent...more

Maynard Nexsen

SC Court of Appeals Rules No Compensable Taking - Case involved in police hostage rescue

Maynard Nexsen on

The South Carolina Supreme Court, in Carolina Conv. Stores v. City of Spartanburg, Op. No. 27663 (S.C.Sup.Ct. filed August 31, 2016) (Shearouse Adv.Sh. No. 35 at 12), tackled the issue of whether a city’s SWAT response to a...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Trouble in Paradise: Florida Third DCA’s Opinion in Beyer v. City of Marathon Declaimed as “For The Birds”

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Nestled in the center of the Florida Keys lies the City of Marathon; a tropical paradise splitting the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. Recently, Florida’s Third DCA hatched the case of Beyer v. City of Marathon. On...more

Bennett Jones LLP

B.C. Surface Rights Board Reduces Rent Payable After Landowners Fail to Prove Loss

Bennett Jones LLP on

In the recent decision of the B.C. Surface Rights Board in Encana Corporation v Perry Burl Piper and Leslie Lancelot Dowd, the Board awarded compensation to landowners less than the amount previously offered by the operator. ...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide