Eminent Domain | Condemnation

Subscribe to Eminent Domain | Condemnation via RSS

In “Spotlight Finds Eminent Domain Crusader,” the New York Times profiles Susette Kelo, the name behind the infamous eminent domain decision Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), and the subject of a recent book about the case, Little Pink House – A True Story of Defiance and Courage, by Jeff Benedict (Grand Central Publishing 2009) (available from Amazon here).

The journey from courtroom to bookstore was not instant, however. Amazingly, although the case, a classic David and Goliath story, was widely discussed, no authors followed up in a timely fashion with a book proposal. Mr. Benedict himself had been busy with other projects. (He has written several books and had a brief fling at politics, losing the Democratic nomination in a run for the House of Representatives from Connecticut’s Second District.)

When he knocked on Susette Kelo’s door without an appointment…

Continue Reading New York Times Profiles Kelo, The “Eminent Domain Crusader”

Little-pink-houseI was fortunate enough yesterday to attend an event with Jeff Benedict, who spoke about his recently-published book Little Pink House – A True Story of Defiance and Courage (Grand Central Publishing 2009) (available from Amazon here). 

Little Pink House gives the backstory to the infamous Supreme Court eminent domain decision Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). It’s not a dry recounting of the legal issues or the Court’s opinion, but a story of how one property owner’s determination to keep her home ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court, and eventually took on a life of its own. The book has been reviewed in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal among other places.  Robert S. Poliner, the Connecticut Ombudsman for Property Rights also reviewed the book; we’ve reprinted his review here.

The highlights of Benedict’s talk:

  • The

…
Continue Reading Little Pink House Event Report

Several diverse items, for your consideration:

  • Columnist George Will opines about the Empress Casino Joliet case — the one where the Illinois Supreme Court held that aregulation imposing a 3%”surcharge” on Illinois casinos with gross receipts over $200 millionper year, and then gives the money to horse racing tracks is not ataking of property.  The U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to review the case. We discussed it here and here (cert petition and amicus briefs included).
  • The ABA Journal writes about George Will opining on the Empress Casino Joliet case.

Continue Reading Monday Round-Up

Little-pink-houseFor those of you within striking range of Santa Barbara on Tuesday, April 14, Jeff Benedict, the author of Little Pink House – A True Story of Defiance and Courage (Grand Central Publishing 2009) (available from Amazon here) will be speaking at the Community Leaders Forum from 5-7pm in the Loggia Ballroom at the Biltmore Santa Barbara. 

Little Pink House is the book about the infamous Supreme Court eminent domain decision Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). The book has been reviewed in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal among other places.  Robert S. Poliner, the Connecticut Ombudsman for Property Rights also reviewed the book, which we reprinted here.

Dana Berliner from the Institute for Justice — and one of the attorneys who represented Susette Kelo — will be on the panel. 

I just happen to be…

Continue Reading So. Cal. Heads-Up: Jeff Benedict/Little Pink House In Santa Barbara On Tuesday 4/14

Sean Hao at the the Honolulu Advertiser reports “Land prices for Hawaii rail route jump $100 million since 2006,” with the lede: “Honolulu real estate prices are expected to fall over the next threeyears, but the estimated cost of acquiring land to build Honolulu’selevated commuter train is going up.”  Indeed, the City’s estimate of the cost of aquiring land has more than doubled, from $70 million to more than $160 million:

To be sure, $160 million to $170 million is a fraction of theoverall estimated $5.4 billion cost of the project. However, the morethan 128 percent rise in projected real estate costs highlightsconcerns raised by critics and others that the city’s financialprojections for the project are unrealistically low.

The increasein real estate costs “seems counter-intuitive,” said Robert Thomas,managing attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation’s Hawaii Center,which lobbies for property owner rights. “That seems odd. If anything,property values are…

Continue Reading Rail Taking Valuations In A Flat To Declining Market

Dean Patty Salkin’s Law of the Land blog posts James Lawlor’s summary of the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision in County of Hawaii v. C&J Coupe Family Ltd. P’ship, 119 Haw. 352, 198 P.3d 615 (2008), “Court Must Decide If Public Purpose Claimed for Road Was Pretextual.” 

The Hawaii Supreme Court ruled a trial court erred by not specifically considering whether a county’s claimed justification for a taking to build a highway was a mere pretext to benefit a private landowner, as the landowner affected by the taking charged.

….

The court said it did not have to accept Justice Kennedy’s formulation to conclude that Kelo and the relevant Hawaii precedents supply ample authority to require the trial court to reach the pretext issue. On its face, the stated public purpose in this case met the public use requirements of both the state and United States constitutions, the…

Continue Reading Pretext In Eminent Domain: Law Of The Land On The Coupe Opinion

A new article from the ABA Journal “Where’s the Revolution” about whether post-Kelo reforms of eminent domain law have any real effect on the law.  According to the summary of the article on the Geo. Mason U. law school web site:

Despite the fact that the Supreme Court’s 5-4 vote in Kelo v. City of New London provoked a significant public backlash, Professors Steven Eagle and Ilya Sominmaintain that most land use laws adopted since the court’s decisionfail to provide significant protection for private ownership ofproperty.

Also quoted in the article are our friends Dana Berliner from the Institute for Justice, and Timothy Sandefur from the Pacific Legal Foundation.  The article is worth a look.Continue Reading New Article: Is Eminent Domain Reform Just Window Dressing?

Our thanks to Dwight Merriam for letting us know about these two decisions. 

  • Gold v. Town of East Haddam, No. 18067 (Conn. Mar. 24, 2009) – On one hand, this is a fairly straightforward summary judgment case: are material facts disputed such that a trial is merited?  On the other, it involves the question of whether the property taken pursuant to a referendum was to be used for a school or some other purpose (under Connecticut law, according to the opinion, a taking for anything but a school must be commenced within six months of the vote authorizing the taking, but a taking for a school purposes is subject to some other time limit).  In reversing the court of appeals’ determination that there was a genuine dispute regarding the uses to which the property taken would be put, the Supreme Court held the language of the referendum itself demonstrated

…
Continue Reading Two Interesting Eminent Domain Decisions

Several items of interest:

  • California Coastal Commission: “You must farm” – As a condition of allowing a Northern California family to build a home, the California Coastal Commission demanded that they dedicate an “agricultural easement” on their 143-acre parcel.  In other words, as a condition of use, the Commission requires a family that has never farmed its land to use its land for farming.  More about the case from the Half Moon Bay Review here. The complaint is posted here.

    “What the Coastal Commission is asking us to do in return for a building permit is to put the remaining acreage into agriculture easement,” Dan Sterling said. “But it doesn’t stop there. They want control of what and how we farm. And even then, they can come in here whenever they want.” That’s Sterling’s biggest issue. He says he’d lose control over all but 10,000 square feet of

…
Continue Reading Tuesday Round-Up: Forced Farming, Tax Or Taking, RLUIPA Loophole

Thank you to those who were able to join us live for today’s teleconference. Here are the links to the additional cases and other items I mentioned (or wanted to mention) in my session on Public Use and Pretext Update:

…
Continue Reading Links From Today’s ABA Teleconference: Hot Topics In Land Use Law 2009