News & Analysis as of

Takings Clause

WV Supreme Court Dissolves Circuit Court's Preliminary Injunction Against Right-to-Work Law

West Virginia's right-to-work law is now effective and, while the legal challenge against the law may continue, the likelihood of success of the challenge is bleak, on its very best day....more

Best Practices for Wastewater Utilities in Light of Virginia Inverse Condemnation Decision

by McGuireWoods LLP on

The Virginia Supreme Court recently expanded the potential liability of Virginia localities and public authorities for backups and overflows from sewage collection and treatment systems. The court allowed insurers who paid...more

Developer Asks SCOTUS To Hear Fla. Takings Case

by Fox Rothschild LLP on

A Florida developer petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a $10 million takings case against the Florida Department of Environmental Protection The developer alleged that the DEP’s denial of a development permit for a...more

Valuation Issues: Recovering Inseparable Damages

by Faegre Baker Daniels on

Imagine this: A local municipality has decided to expand the road behind your property. The road expansion project has many components. The number of lanes will increase from two to four. There will be a new raised median in...more

Murr v. Wisconsin: Defining the Property Affected by a Regulatory Taking

The Supreme Court of the United States recently decided the case Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214 (June 23, 2017), which laid out a new test for determining whether separate parcels of land should be evaluated as a single parcel...more

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

?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

324 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.