Come & Take It: The Eminent Domain Podcast (Episode #13), Featuring Winstead Shareholder Tom Forestier
Eminent Domain: First Principles, Kelo, and In Service of Infrastructure Buildout
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 140: Listen and Learn -- Regulatory Takings
#WorkforceWednesday: Mandatory Vaccination, Tipped Worker Rule, and SCOTUS Rules Against Organized Labor - Employment Law This Week®
More Emerging Litigation Claims and Demands from COVID-19
Real Estate Developer Rights When Cities Demand Too Much
The Koontz Decision: Limits Conditions a Government can Impose on Developers
Supreme Court Hands Landowners a Major Victory - Nossaman's Brad Kuhn
Is a business temporarily closed by order of the government entitled to compensation? Two groups of plaintiffs have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court hoping not just for a “yes” but an overhaul of a half-century of regulatory...more
Investors and developers scour the Southern California real estate market searching for opportunities to buy dated houses that they can demolish and replace with large, modern homes to sell for much more. A few individuals...more
Tune in to the latest episode of "Come and Take It: The Eminent Domain Podcast." Host Bobby Debelak sits down with Winstead Shareholder Thomas J. Forestier, a leading infrastructure and eminent domain attorney with 37+ years...more
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that “No person shall be… deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just...more
According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the answer is a definitive yes....more
As we have previously discussed, downzoning (changing the zoning designation for property from a more intensive use to a more restrictive use) can possibly rise to the level of a regulatory taking, depending on each...more
Facts: The property owner alleged a per se taking and inverse condemnation in the expansion of a road that increased surface and stormwater runoff flowing under the property and ultimately a sinkhole in the parking lot. The...more
The Township of Canton, Michigan, like many local governments, requires property owners who remove trees of a certain size to either replace those trees or pay into a fund for the planting of new trees. The Sixth Circuit...more
About to enter eminent domain proceedings? Chances are your case falls into one of the three main ‘taking’ categories defined by your state’s constitution. 3 Basic ‘Takings’ Categories for Eminent Domain Cases in the...more
The California Coastal Act is a regulatory regime with many layers and complexities. Generally, however, the Act requires development within a designated coastal zone to obtain a coastal development permit. This permit may be...more
Welcome back to the Bar Exam Toolbox podcast! In today's episode from our "Listen and Learn" series, we tackle the topic of regulatory takings, which is often tested in crossover essay questions that cover both Property and...more
The Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (No. 20-107), a case that has generated considerable amicus participation and press coverage. In that case, union organizers, relying on a...more
Indiana, like every other State, has adopted a Right to Farm Act to “reduce the loss to the state of its agricultural resources by limiting the circumstances under which agricultural operations may be deemed to be a...more
Land use & zoning attorneys, Stanley B. Price and Anthony De Yurre, discuss what real estate developer's rights are when the government demands too much, and where the line should be drawn according to both statute and case...more
The Washington Supreme Court recently overturned years of precedent and made it more difficult for parties to claim that government regulation has effected an unconstitutional “taking” of their property requiring...more
When state and local governments impose unreasonable conditions or exactions on private property, owners pursuing a regulatory takings claim often face a maze of procedural obstacles just to have their case heard. ...more
As we’ve seen all too many times in California, when local municipalities delay development approvals — even improperly — courts are reluctant to find liability under an inverse condemnation cause of action and award...more
On March 5, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Knick v. Township of Scott (Case No. 17-647) to address the requirement, established in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S....more
The stakes could not be higher; would the property yield one or two waterfront building lots? On June 23, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States decided a case that involved the merger of two parcels of property...more
In Dryden Oaks, LLC v. San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, __ Cal.App.5th __ (October 19, 2017), the Fourth District Court of Appeal published a previously unpublished opinion addressing both regulatory takings and...more
A fundamental precept of American law is the authority of the government, in the exercise of the police power for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the public, to regulate the conduct of individuals in the...more
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
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
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
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