News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Construction Project

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

California’s ‘New’ Construction Stormwater General Permit—Time To Engage?

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck on

On Aug. 28–29, 2024, approximately 50 people gathered at the University of California San Diego Extension to learn about the California State Water Resources Control Board’s (State Water Board) reissuance of the Construction...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Federal Court Invalidates Parts of the US DOL’s Davis-Bacon Act (DBA) Rule – Particularly Impacting the Transportation of Supplies...

Amundsen Davis LLC on

On June 24, 2024, a federal district court judge enjoined parts of the United States Department of Labor’s (US DOL's) August 23, 2023 prevailing wage rule that greatly expanded the definition of “construction” on federal...more

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Supreme Court Impact Fee Decision Creates Opportunities for Developers and Property Owners

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass on

On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that may significantly affect how development impact fees are assessed in California. In Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the Court unanimously held that...more

Stoel Rives - Ahead of Schedule

The United States Supreme Court Determines There Is No Distinction Between Legislative and Administrative Takings

Stoel Rives - Ahead of Schedule on

In a typical permitting process, the local government may place certain conditions on issuing a building permit to further a legitimate public purpose.  While the local government has “substantial authority to regulate land...more

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

Sheetz v. County of El Dorado: The Supreme Court's Latest Restraint on Development Fees

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

On April 12, 2024, Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, 601 U.S. 267, 144 S. Ct. 893 (2024). Sheetz concerned El Dorado County's imposition of...more

Polsinelli

SCOTUS Decision May Limit Municipalities’ Ability to Collect Impact Fees

Polsinelli on

In April, the Supreme Court held in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California that the Takings Clause of the United States Constitution applies to legislative land-use conditions, such as impact fees. This will result in...more

Downey Brand LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That Legislatively-imposed Permit Conditions Must Satisfy the ‘Essential Nexus’ and ‘Rough...

Downey Brand LLP on

In a highly-anticipated case revolving around development impact fees, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, 144 S.Ct. 893 (2024) that legislatively-imposed conditions on building permits...more

Cozen O'Connor

U.S. Supreme Court Revisits the Right of Local Government to Exact Permit Conditions from Developers

Cozen O'Connor on

The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) has again rejected a state's narrow interpretation of the constitutional limits on government's ability to impose development conditions. A unanimous SCOTUS ruled on April 12 in favor of the...more

Sands Anderson PC

Sheetz v. County of El Dorado: Chipping Away at Elected Officials’ Power Over Development Costs

Sands Anderson PC on

The US Supreme Court’s decision in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado earlier this month will affect how local governments impose impact fees in the future and who pays certain development costs....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

What the Sheetz: Where California Development Impact Fees Stand Following Recent Supreme Court Decision

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Undoubtedly, development impact fees (DIFs) can make or break the pro forma of any development project. Until this month, developers hoping to challenge the assessment of project-related DIFs were often limited in the causes...more

Allen Matkins

Sustainable Development and Land Use Update 4.18.24

Allen Matkins on

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated ruling in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado. The case concerned the legality of a local jurisdiction’s imposition of a traffic impact...more

Perkins Coie

Supreme Court Rules Legislatively Adopted Exactions Not Exempt From Nollan/Dolan Scrutiny 

Perkins Coie on

In a dispute over a traffic impact fee imposed on a residential building permit by El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the long-standing position of California and other state courts that the Takings...more

Rosenberg Martin Greenberg LLP

Supreme Court Leaves the Sheetz Out In Takings Case

Rosenberg Martin Greenberg LLP on

When the government wants to take private property for a public project, it must compensate the owner at fair market value. The just compensation concept comes from the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which provides: “nor...more

Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti PC

U.S. Supreme Court: Legislative Impact Fees Can Be Unconstitutional Exactions Too

Otten Johnson Robinson Neff + Ragonetti PC on

Last week, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, in which the Court held that for the purpose of a takings claim there is no distinction in whether permit conditions...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

U.S. Supreme Court: Takings Clause Applies to Impact Fees on New Development

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck on

The Sheetz v. County of El Dorado decision will create uncertainty in California, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and many other states as cities, counties, developers and property owners reexamine whether existing impact fee...more

Venable LLP

SCOTUS Rules for Landowner in Fifth Amendment Takings Clause Case

Venable LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) held that the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause does not distinguish between legislative and administrative land‑use permit conditions. Building permit...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Supreme Court Concludes the Takings Clause Applies to Legislative Fee Enactments

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

On April 12, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Sheetz v. Cnty. Of El Dorado, California, 22-1074 (U.S. Apr. 12, 2024) and unanimously held that legislative actions can still be unconstitutional exactions...more

Allen Matkins

Supreme Court Narrows Local Governments’ Ability to Impose Impact Fees – A Potential Sea Change for California

Allen Matkins on

On April 12, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated ruling in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, U.S. No. 22-1074 (petition for certiorari granted 9/29/23) (Sheetz). The case concerned the...more

Epstein Becker & Green

Unanimity Among Justices Rules the Day - SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

Some commentators claim there are bitter divisions among the Justices, roiling the Court and its processes. Many of the same commentators were critical of the Court’s decision holding that former President Trump was not...more

Nossaman LLP

Supreme Court Holds that Legislative Impact Fee Programs Can Constitute a Taking

Nossaman LLP on

Today, April 12, 2024, in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously overruled more than two decades of California precedent, holding that legislatively established development impact fee programs must...more

Saiber LLC

SCOTUS Agrees to Hear Case Concerning the Scope of Constitutional Challenges to Land Use Permit Conditions

Saiber LLC on

The Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California, a case that concerns whether land use permit conditions in the form of monetary exactions created by legislation are...more

Nossaman LLP

Are Legislatively Enacted Development Impact Fees on the Chopping Block?

Nossaman LLP on

The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in George Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, agreeing to answer the question of whether legislatively enacted development impact fees are subject to a lower level of constitutional...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Supreme Court Case Will Clarify Constitutionality of Permit Exaction Fees

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Summary - The Supreme Court of the United States announced that it will hear a Takings Clause case under the Fifth Amendment that will clarify whether permit exaction fees authorized by legislation are exempt from the...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Questions Remain After EPA and the Army Corps Update the “Waters of the United States” Definition Following Sackett v. EPA

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On August 29, 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) released the text of a rule further revising the definition of “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”) that the...more

Goulston & Storrs PC

Regulatory Changes: Massachusetts Wetlands Permitting

Goulston & Storrs PC on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued an opinion in Sackett v. EPA that established a stricter test for whether the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) applies to a wetland. The test limits federal jurisdiction to wetlands with a...more

28 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide