Eminent Domain | Condemnation

Subscribe to Eminent Domain | Condemnation via RSS

According to this report, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has agreed to review Kelmm v. American Transmission Co., No. 2009AP2784 (Aug. 10, 2010) (a court of appeals’ decision we noted here). In that case, the court of appeals held that in order to obtain litigation expenses under a state statute which provides that a property owner may recover expenses if a condemnation award exceeds the “jurisdictional offer” by at least $700 and at least 15%, there must be a “jurisdictional offer” made.

Wisconsin eminent domain procedure has a two-fold path, one of which results in a “jurisdictional offer,” and the other a negotiated settlement. Either path can end up before the condemnation commission. ATC wanted to place an electricity transmission line across Klemm’s land. Rather than fight the taking, the Klemms “agreed to the $7,750 compensation ATC offered in negotiations, with the understanding they had the right to…

Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court To Consider Litigation Expenses In Negotiated Condemnation Cases

Check this out. The Hawaii Legislature is considering a bill requiring the State and the counties to take private roads, waterways, and water courses “upon request” of an adjacent landowner:

(a) Upon request by the owner of land adjacent to a privately owned highway, waterway, or watercourse, the State shall initiate condemnation proceedings for a public purpose pursuant to section 101-2, unless the State makes a written determination that a county is the more appropriate jurisdiction to initiate condemnation proceedings on the private property. For the purposes of this section “private property” means a privately owned highway, waterway, or water course.

(b) If the State declines to exercise its power of eminent domain to condemn the private property pursuant to subsection (a), then the county in which the private property is located shall initiate condemnation proceedings pursuant to section 101-14.

(c) In fixing the compensation to be paid for condemnation…

Continue Reading Hawaii Legislature Considering A Bill Requiring State Or Counties To Take Private Roads Upon Request By Adjacent Landowner

512n15x1gdl_ss500_

Hat tip: the Clancy Brothers‘ “They’re Moving Father’s Grave to Build a Sewer” (via Gideon Kanner). As we noted in our earlier post, life has imitated art: Chicago is seeking to take cemetery and move the graves in order to expand O’Hare airport.

As reported here (“High court ducks battle between O’Hare, cemetery), the saga now appears to have ended. The Illinois Supreme Court has denied review of the court of appeals’ September 2010 decision allowing the condemnation.

The court of appeals concluded that the claims of the living relatives of the residents of St. Johannes Cemetery were adjudicated in federal court when the district court dismissed their complaint for failure to state a claim and the Seventh Circuit affirmed. Thus, their subsequent claims in state court were res judicata (that means “claim preclusion” to you young ‘uns).

Here, all claims, both federal and state, clearly…

Continue Reading “Now, What’s The Use Of Having A Religion, If When You’re Dead Your Troubles Never Cease…”

Cutting_edge_2010

The ABA has announced the forthcoming publication of a new book by the State and Local Government Law Section: At the Cutting Edge 2010: Land Use Law from The Urban Lawyer, edited by my colleague Dwight H. Merriam, and which is “[a]n essential resource for practitioners, planning professionals and students, this book provides information and insight into timely issues impacting land use law.”

It’s not available just yet, but is scheduled for publication on December 31, and is available for pre-order here (the usual discounts for ABA/Section members, and for law student members, apply).

I contributed a chapter, Recent Developments in Challenging the Right to Take in Eminent Domain. I received my advance copy today, and it’s a handy little volume that has the latest developments in the law relating to (among other subjects):

  • Cellular telecommunications facilities
  • Exactions and impact fees
  • Trends in green buildings laws
  • Ethical

…
Continue Reading New Book: At The Cutting Edge 2010: Land Use Law From The Urban Lawyer

11.LULHI On January 13 and 14, 2011, I’ll be leading two sessions in the fifth Hawaii Land Use Law conference. This one only comes around every two years, so this is your chance to get updated on the hottest topics by a stellar faculty.

My sessions will cover Coastal Issues (which includes shoreline boundary, takings, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Stop the Beach Renourishment case), and Water Issues (which will cover instream flow standards, public trust and private rights, and the Maui Water cases).

The keynote speaker will be Professor Gideon Kanner, who will present “Taking a Critical Look at 30 Years of the Supreme Court’s Takings Jurisprudence.” That alone will be worth the admission price.

Also of note: the seminar includes 3.25 Hawaii MCPE ethics credits, so you can fulfill your 2011 requirements in one sitting (you can attend the ethics portion for only $195). Members of the HSBA…

Continue Reading January 13-14, 2011: Fifth Hawaii Land Use Conference

I’m an alum of Columbia University (LLM, 1995), so I’m on the list to receive the semi-regular emails sent out by the law school and the alumni association, informing me about a recent faculty hire, or containing the latest plea to enhance the endowment.

So today, I get this from University president Lee Bollinger, about the expansion of the Morningside Heights campus. That “17-acre campus” mentioned is the one that is at the heart of the eminent domain case that only yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed to go forward:

Dear Members of the Columbia Community:

One hundred and fifteen years ago, in 1895, President Seth Low presided over a small ceremony on the new 17-acre campus known as Morningside Heights to lay the cornerstone of Low Library. He already had presciently observed that it might even take a century to build the last building. This past Friday, December…

Continue Reading Amazing: A Summary Of Columbia Expansion That Doesn’t Mention “Eminent Domain”

The Court has denied certiorari in Tuck-It-Away, Inc. v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., No. 10-402 (cert. petition filed Sep. 21, 2010), the case about the New York State Urban Development Corporation’s attempt to take property for a new Columbia campus.

More abou the case here. Here’s the order, if you are interested.Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Declines Review Of Columbia Eminent Domain Case

Aliaba

Thursday-Saturday, February 17-19, 2011, come join us for the 28th annual presentation of the advanced-level ALI-ABA Course of Study, Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, and the sixth annual presentation of the basic-level ALI-ABA Course of Study, Condemnation 101: Making the Complex Simple in Eminent Domain, both at the Hyatt Regency in Coral Gables (Miami), Florida. Both courses also are offered via live webcast, available either in their entirety or in segments.

Update: Register online between December 12 and December 31, 2010, and you can get a 30% tuition break. Simply enter coupon code DECS30 when you check out to receive your discount (this includes ALI-ABA’s, live and online courses, telephone seminars, webcasts and on-demand CLE, coursebooks, DVDs, mp3s, subscriptions to periodicals, books, and all online content, including forms). This offer may not be combined with other ALI-ABA discounts, group rates or bundled products. This discount is only available for new…

Continue Reading Mark Your Calendars – Feb. 17-19, 2011: Annual ALI-ABA Condemnation Law Programs

The Columbia Spectator, the student newspaper of Columbia University has a story about  Tuck-It-Away, Inc. v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., No. 10-402 (cert. petition filed Sep. 21, 2010), the case about the New York State Urban Development Corporation’s attempt to take property for a new Columbia campus, which is up for consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court at today’s conference.

In U.S. Supreme Court to consider hearing M’ville case, the Spectator quotes the property owners and their lawyer:

At stake are the only properties in the expansion zone—from 125th to 134th streets, from Broadway to 12th Avenue—that Columbia does not yet own: Nick Sprayregen’s four Tuck-It-Away Self-Storage locations and two gas stations owned by Gurnam Singh and Parminder Kaur. Under eminent domain, the state would turn the properties over to the University in exchange for market-rate compensation for Sprayregen, Singh, and Kaur.

“The significance…

Continue Reading Columbia Spectator On The Columbia Eminent Domain Cert Petition

SCOTUSblog has listed in Tuck-It-Away, Inc. v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., No. 10-402 (cert. petition filed Sep. 21, 2010) as a “Petition to Watch”  (scroll down to the fourth case) for tomorrow’s conference. The results of the conference should be released on Monday morning.

SCOTUSblog has posted most the cert stage briefing, or you can get all of the briefs here. As we noted earlier today, Norman Oder has posted an excellent summary of the issues in the case on his Atlantic Yards Report blog.

While we are talking Tuck-It-Away, check out this column from the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which includes a video (also posted here) of the petitioner Nick Sprayregen, his counsel, New York civil rights attorney Norman Siegel, and New York State Senator Bill Perkins (who filed amicus briefs supporting Sprayregen) after the oral arguments in the New York Court Continue Reading Columbia Eminent Domain Cert Petition Is a SCOTUSblog “Petition To Watch”