ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Real Estate & Property Law Blogs -> inversecondemnation

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Real Estate & Property Law

: inversecondemnation

Friday Round-Up

By Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)

ADVERTISEMENTS

Here's what piquing our interest today:

  • Not! - It looks like our grandiose prediction that "Feds Likely To Seek Cert In Casitas (Water Rights Taking Case)" turned out to be wrong since nothing is showing on the SCOTUS docket and the deadline was last Friday. Maybe the SG decided, after some deliberation, that it was better to give this one a pass. In Casitas Municipal Water District v. United States, 543 F.3d 1276 (Fed. Cir. 2008), the Federal Circuit held that contractual water rights were taken when the federal government required the landowner to construct a fish ladder and divert water in order to protect endangered steelhead trout. The court held that the requirement resulted in a physical diversion of water for public use. The Federal Circuit's opinion is posted here, and the court's denial of rehearing and rehearing en banc -- which generated concurring and dissenting opinions, see 556 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2009) -- is available here.
  • 9/11 Case Could Bring Broad Shift on Civil Suits - The NY Times weighs in on Iqbal, the "most consequential decision of the Supreme Court's last term." That's the one where the Court held that instead of vague "notice pleading," a complaint must state a "plausible claim for relief," which is measured not by the allegations in the complaint, but the district court's "judicial experience and common sense." This case is of particular interest to property owners challenging pretextual public use in federal court.
  • Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles, No. B206102 (Cal. Ct. App. July 22, 2009) - a decision from California's Second Appellate Division about affordable housing. State law specific, and deals with technical issues of whether a  municipal ordinance is preempted by state law, but an interesting read even for those who do not practice in the Golden State.

Full post as published by inversecondemnation on July 24, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0035 secs (from cache 11/04/26 08:28:52)