News & Analysis as of

Takings Clause

Utah Considers Charter School Eminent Domain Issues

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

The Utah legislature is considering policy changes regarding the acquisition of land for new charter schools and further expansions of existing schools. Specifically, there currently is uncertainty as to the eminent domain...more

Tree-Preservation Ordinances in Texas Municipalities May Constitute Regulatory Takings

by Locke Lord LLP on

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an opinion on July 14, 2017 concluding that municipal tree-preservation ordinances in Texas may, in certain unspecified factual circumstances, constitute a regulatory taking under the...more

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

Judge Finds Florida Just Compensation Law Applies To Federal Pipeline Case

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

Property owners whose land will be taken for the Sabal Trail Transmission LLC’s natural gas pipeline should be compensated under Florida law rather than federal rules, a Florida federal judge ruled....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

Does the Concept of Regulatory Takings Comport With Original Intent?

On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court issued an important regulatory takings case, refining the test to be used to determine what is the appropriate unit of property to use to assess the impact of a regulation. It’s an...more

The Supreme Court - June 23, 2017

by Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Bd., No. 16-399: Petitioner Anthony Perry was a federal employee at the U.S. Census Bureau and in 2011, received notice he would be terminated due to spotty attendance. Perry and the Bureau...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

Not for the Taking: In Murr v. Wisconsin, the Supreme Court Rules that Two Lots Be Considered as a Whole

On June 23, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court held that there was no compensable taking of Petitioners’ property in Murr v. Wisconsin. Petitioners who own two adjacent lots along a waterfront in Wisconsin were not deprived of all...more

SCOTUS Decides Regulatory Takings Case

The US Supreme Court today issued its latest pronouncement on regulatory takings, Murr et. al, v. Wisconsin, et al. Justice Kennedy wrote for the Court, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan. The issue was...more

The Supreme Court - June 5, 2017

by Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in five cases today: Advocate Health Care Network v. Stapleton, No. 16-74: This case involves whether three church-affiliated nonprofits that run hospitals and offer...more

Tennessee Prohibits Eminent Domain For Industrial Parks.

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

Tennessee has enacted a law that will prohibit the use of eminent domain to condemn land for industrial parks. It deletes the “industrial parks” exception for takings under 29-17-102 (E), . It also provides that any property...more

Florida Changes Appraiser Licensing Law

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

Florida has enacted a bill changing its appraiser licensing law. HB 927 includes changes advocated by the Appraisal Institute. The law defines an “evaluation” as a “valuation permitted by any federal financial institutions...more

Town of DISH’s and Its Residents’ Takings Claims Barred By Statute of Limitations

Litigating parties may be so invested in the rightness of their cause that they neglect to check the calendar, and the relevant stature of limitations. On May 19, the Texas Supreme Court decided the case of Town of DISH, et...more

Texas Considers Eminent Domain Bill

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

The Texas Senate approved an eminent domain bill intending to expand on current legislation. The bill’s author, State Senator Lois Kolkhorst, said “This bill is designed to build off of Senate Bill 18 six years later as we’ve...more

Federal Circuit Rules that Starr International Lacks Standing to Pursue Class Claims Stemming from the U.S. Government’s...

On May 9, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) affirmed in part and reversed in part an earlier decision from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which had held that aspects of the...more

321 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 13
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.