Once Removed Episode 10: Trustee Removal and Case Update on Leo Kahn Revocable Trust
Red Hot Apartment Investment Market Starts to Cool
State Land Use Board Weighs in on Oregon Coast Fight Over Short Term Rentals
Developing Philly: The State of Philadelphia's Tax Abatements in 2022
Title Insurance and Your Transaction
Lead Exposure Claims: Proactive Strategies for Effective Resolution
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 319: Listen and Learn -- Negligence: Duties of Landlords, Owners, and Possessors of Land
Law Brief®: Robert Wolf, Alexander Tiktin and Richard Schoenstein Discuss the Continuing Foreclosure/Eviction Moratorium
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 149: Listen and Learn -- Negligence: Duties of Landlords, Owners, and Possessors of Land
Eminent Domain: First Principles, Kelo, and In Service of Infrastructure Buildout
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 310: Listen and Learn -- Adverse Possession
Managing Apartment Turnover: From Launch to $10M Series A, with Rent Ready's Jonathan Kite
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 144: Listen and Learn -- Adverse Possession
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 305: Listen and Learn -- Property Crimes
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 140: Listen and Learn -- Regulatory Takings
On-Demand Webinar | Living on the Edge: Managing Sea Level Rise in California
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 122: Listen and Learn -- Easements (Real Property)
On-Demand Webinar | Eminent Domain in 2020: A Year in Review
Design-Build: Everything That Was Old Is New Again
Law Brief: Your Ad Here: Outdoor Advertising and the Law
Osceola County, City of St. Cloud, and City of Mt. Dora are all set to vote on proposed increases to impact fees that, if approved, will substantially increase the cost of development in these jurisdictions. Below is...more
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
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
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
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
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
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
The unanimous opinion holds that development impact fees established through the legislative process are subject to constitutional scrutiny as potential regulatory takings. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the...more
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
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
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
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
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 12, 2024, that the "Takings Clause" enshrined in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies equally to legislative and administratively imposed land use permitting fees. Since...more
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
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
On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court decided Sheetz v. El Dorado County, No. 22-1074, holding that the Takings Clause “does not distinguish between legislative and administrative permit conditions,” but instead...more
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
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
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
Many communities desire to place age restrictions on who can live in the community as such restrictions allow a community to provide the benefits of senior housing to its residents, including a prohibition of children under...more
For the first time in over 50 years, the City of Portland is rewriting its Land Use Code, which is found in Chapter 14 of the City’s Code of Ordinances. The effort involves several substantive policy changes aimed at making...more
When imposing a school impact fee on residential development, a district need not separately analyze particular subtypes of projects; the authorizing statutes simply require a reasonable relationship between the need for the...more
On June 18, 2019, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed House Bill 207 into law, effective July 1, 2019. This law was originated by members of the Greater Orlando Builders Association. ...more
Land Use and Development Case Summaries (short form) - 1. PLANNING AND ZONING - CENTER FOR COMMUNITY ACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE V. CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, 26 Cal. App. 5th 689 (2018) - Based on the language and...more