Takings

News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court Puts Its “Takings Law” Foot Down

In Horne I, the Supreme Court held that a property owner, facing a governmental enforcement action, can assert as a defense that the action effects a “taking” of one’s property (here, a raisin crop) “without just...more

Supreme Court Update: Horne V. Dep't Of Agriculture (14-275), Kimble V. Marvel Entertainment (13-720), Patel V. City Of Los...

Raisins, radioactive wrists, Red Roof registries, and reformatory roughhousing were all on the Court's radar Monday (it's a very broad radar horizon), as it issued decisions in Horne v. Dep't of Agriculture (14-275), holding...more

The California Raisins Strike Back

Horne v. Department of Agriculture, No. 14-275 (U.S. June 22, 2015) - Why It Matters: In a pro-property rights opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court applies Fifth Amendment “takings” analysis to a federal program that...more

Supreme Court Decides Horne v. Department of Agriculture

On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court decided Horne v. Department of Agriculture, No. 14-275, holding that the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause applies to personal property as well as real property, and a requirement that...more

Horne v. USDA: US Supreme Court Sides with Raisin Farmer

The United States Supreme Court ruled that a USDA marketing order constituted a taking of a raisin farmer's private property for which just compensation is due. This article offers a detailed analysis of the Court's opinion....more

California Supreme Court Holds Inclusionary Zoning Subject to Rational Basis Review

2013 was a banner year for developers under the takings clause, as both the U.S. Supreme Court and California Supreme Court issued decisions expanding the developers’ ability to challenge exactions as unconstitutional. In...more

California Supreme Court Endorses City Authority to Adopt Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

On June 15, 2015, in a decision that came as a surprise to many observers, the California Supreme Court unanimously rejected a challenge to San Jose’s inclusionary housing ordinance which had been filed by the California...more

California Supreme Court Upholds Inclusionary Housing Zoning

California Building Industry Association v. City of San Jose - Why It Matters: In a much-anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court has settled for now the question of whether or not a municipality may condition...more

California Supreme Upholds City of San Jose Inclusionary Housing Set-Aside Ordinance

Today, the California Supreme Court unanimously upheld the City of San Jose’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, rejecting a facial constitutional challenge brought in California Building Industry Association (CBIA) v. City of...more

How One Misstep Resulted in a $2.5 Million Lesson

Every so often, a decision comes out that makes you stop for a second and take a breath. Generally, these decisions have two essential components: (1) they deal with a statute of limitations; and (2) they involve millions of...more

Big Win for Anti-GMO Groups as Federal Judge Upholds Jackson County GMO Ban

On Friday, Federal Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke partially dismissed a lawsuit brought by commercial alfalfa farmers seeking to overturn a Jackson County ordinance that banned the use of GMO seed stock (“It is a county...more

When It Comes to Property Acquisitions and Private Development, Timing May Be Everything

As the old adage goes, the three most important things to consider with real estate are location, location, and location. But any developer who has lived through a real estate cycle, and any public agency that is under a...more

Bats in the Balance: Northern Long-Eared Bat Listing and Interim 4(d) Rule

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“Service”) recently listed the northern long-eared bat (the “Bat”) as a “threatened” species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and issued an interim “species-specific” rule...more

N.C. Court of Appeals Dismisses Municipal Takings Claim For Failing "Public Benefit" Standard

Today, the N.C. Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a takings case filed by a local government. The case is Town of Matthews v. Wright, No. COA14-943 (April 21, 2015)....more

Update on Two Recent California Eminent Domain Cases

I wanted to provide a quick update on two recent cases from the California Court of Appeal. The first, Golden State Water Company v. Casitas Municipal Water District (April 14, 2015), involves what appears to be an...more

Take My Home, Please: In Wake of Court Decision, N.C. General Assembly Seeks to Repeal "Map Act"

The Map Act -- also known as Chapter 136, Article 2E of the General Statutes of North Carolina -- allows the N.C.D.O.T., local governments or other governing bodies to file with the local register of deeds an official...more

Ninth Circuit Dismisses Action Alleging San Francisco Violated the Endangered Species Act

In a three-page memorandum decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed Wild Equity and other groups’ appeal from a lower court decision, dismissing as moot a lawsuit alleging that the City and...more

2014 Eminent Domain Year in Review & 2015 Forecast

At first it seemed 2014 had been a relatively slow year for eminent domain cases. But looking back, there was more activity than we initially recalled. There were few decisions that provided any dramatic shift in the...more

California Raisins Ripening (Again) in the Supreme Court’s Sun

Takings law is complicated enough but leave it to the frequently reversed U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to twist it out of shape so much as to dare the Supreme Court to reverse it not just once but twice in the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Take a Second Look at Takings Case

The burning question, is why? While this is not the first time the U.S. Supreme Court has ever granted a petition for review in the same case, it is certainly not common. And, it is downright uncommon for the Supreme Court...more

Case Could Alter the Reach of the Endangered Species Act

The U.S. District Court for the District of Utah attracted national attention with its November decision in People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in which it ruled...more

Supreme Court Update: Jennings V. Stephens And Order List

Greetings, Court fans! We're back with breaking news on the certiorari front, along with a summary of one of Wednesday's decisions, Jennings v. Stephens (13-7211), on the application of certain longstanding principles of...more

Prairie Dogs vs. Congress

A recent ruling by a Utah federal judge, although directed at the Endangered Species Act (ESA), may have far-reaching implications on Congress' commerce clause powers. In a first-of-its-kind ruling, U.S. District Judge Dee...more

The US Department of Justice Seeks to Intervene in the Washington Redskins’ Trademark Suit to Defend the Constitutionality of the...

The Washington Redskins professional football team will soon not only be battling Native Americans over the registrability of the REDSKINS trademark, but will also have to cross swords with the US Government. Last week, the...more

Rising Sea Levels and Prohibited "Takings" - A Different Sort of Climate Change Litigation

A little noted anniversary passed this past week. The odd 2009 storm, Nor’Ida (the progeny of a nor’easter and a hurricane), swept along the east coast pounding some areas with record storm surge five years ago in the second...more

218 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 9

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*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.
×