News & Analysis as of

Takings Clause Land Developers Inverse Condemnation

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

Nossaman LLP

Court Clarifies Rules for Takings, Precondemnation Damages Claims

Nossaman LLP on

Two of the more complicated issues eminent domain attorneys face are analyzing whether government conduct rises to the level of a taking, and whether the government engaged in precondemnation conduct that gives rise to...more

Miller Starr Regalia

“No Build” Condition On Shopping Center Property Is Compensable Regulatory Taking

Miller Starr Regalia on

The Court of Appeal has squarely held that a prohibition on development of a portion of a shopping center project site, in order to “bank” that property for possible future acquisition, was a temporary taking. (Jefferson...more

Perkins Coie

If At First You Succeed, Don’t Try, Try, Try Again

Perkins Coie on

The Fifth District Court of Appeal has confirmed that the 90-day statute of limitations under the Subdivision Map Act includes takings claims arising out of Map Act decisions. Honchariw_v._County_of_Stanislaus, No. F069145...more

4 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