The Supreme Court is apparently not done with its recent interest in takings decisions. Following the decisions in Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States, Horne v. Department of Agriculture, and Koontz v. St....more
OK, I'll admit it. A year ago I thought this whole condemnation-of-underwater-mortgages thing would die off pretty quickly. I predicted we'd never see any large-scale condemnation effort. So far, I've missed badly on the...more
The background facts of a recent Federal Circuit opinion, TrinCo Investment Co. v. United States, No. 2012-5130 (July 18, 2013), seem deceptively simple: the government removes $6.6 million of timber from private property...more
9/4/2013
When a public agency seeks to impose a land exaction on a planned development, the analysis of whether the proposed dedication meets the necessary "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" tests is often cumbersome and...more
Eminent domain attorneys struggle with a concept foreign to most civil litigators: figuring out the roles of the judge and jury. Even most non-attorneys know the basic rule of trial: the jury is the "fact-finder." But in...more
When a public agency seeks to impose a land exaction on a planned development, the analysis of whether the proposed dedication meets the necessary "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" tests is often cumbersome and...more
As an eminent domain lawyer, I sometimes feel about takings claims like Justice Potter Stewart felt about obscenity: I know it when I see it. But every so often, a case comes along that reminds us that we might need to dig...more
The City of Agoura Hills is moving forward with its plans for the U.S. 101/Palo Comado Canyon Road Interchange at Chesebro Road....more
The City of Santee's Prospect Avenue Widening Project is moving forward, and because the City has not been able to secure all the necessary right of way voluntarily, the City is now poised to condemn the remaining interests...more
In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Thomas, the Supreme Court held that California raisin handlers could assert a takings claim as an affirmative defense to an enforcement action filed by the United States. Horne v....more
We've talked in the past about just how hard it is to state a regulatory takings claim under the Supreme Court's decision in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104. I'd go through the test and how...more
4/26/2013
Recently, we came across an interesting request from an attorney for a condemnee. The condemnee had filed a Disclaimer in the eminent domain action, stating that they had no interest in the property being condemned. This,...more
Following the 2005 Kelo decision, California enacted a number of modest eminent domain reforms. For eminent domain attorneys, the most significant changes arguably came in the procedures for obtaining prejudgment possession....more
4/4/2013
For those of you who attended the joint meeting today between Chapter 1 of the International Right of Way Association and the Appraisal Institute, we promised to post a cheat sheet that reminds you about the cases associated...more
Given how much publicity the proposal to condemn underwater mortgages received when it first appeared last summer, I suppose it's not surprising that San Bernardino's decision last week not to move forward has also garnered a...more
For the better part of a year, we've been writing about the controversial proposal to use the power of eminent domain to condemn underwater mortgages, allowing homeowners to have a new loan that better reflects the underlying...more
As we previewed in our recent "year in review" piece, the U.S. Supreme Court has some takings issues before it this term. One case, Koontz v. St. John's River Water Management District, took center stage yesterday. ...more
Originally Published in Daily Journal, January 15, 2013.
As we look back on 2012, federal funds continued to make their way to local projects and shovels continued to break ground for infrastructure projects. This led to...more
1/15/2013
/ Arkansas Game & Fish v U.S. ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Condemnation ,
DOT v Dry Canyon ,
Eminent Domain ,
Evidence ,
Fifth Amendment ,
Flooding ,
Jury Questions ,
Just Compensation ,
Loss of Goodwill ,
Mortgages ,
SCOTUS ,
Takings Clause ,
Underwater Homeowners ,
Valuation Experts
Originally Published in The Real Estate Finance Journal, December 17, 2012.
In eminent domain proceedings, property owners are granted the right to have a jury determine just compensation. But the presentation of...more
Eminent domain cases are unique in that the roles of the judge and the jury do not match the typical civil jury trial experience where the jury is the arbiter of fact and the judge decides the law. In eminent domain, the...more
Earlier this week, I spent a day in Los Angeles at a seminar involving regulatory takings issues. It featured a great panel of speakers on a variety of takings, eminent domain, and land use issues. (In fairness, you should...more
In my recent post on City of Corona v. Liston Brick Company of Corona, 2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 873, I took a few minutes to discuss the conflict under California law concerning what happens when one side presents a valuation...more