Eminent Domain | Condemnation

Subscribe to Eminent Domain | Condemnation via RSS

IMG_20170726_170437

Here are links to the cases and other materials which I mentioned today in our session at the Transportation Research Board‘s 56th Annual Workshop on Transportation Law in Salt Lake City:

…
Continue Reading Links And Materials From Today’s TRB Eminent Domain Session

SSRN

 A couple of weeks ago, we noted that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Murr v. Wisconsin would no doubt be a boon for law review editors. To avoid shirking our duty, we’ve spent the interim doing some writing, adding a drop to the flood. First draft done, posted on SSRN here. 

Emphasis on “draft,” so send your comments. Continue Reading Restatement (SCOTUS) of Property: What Happened to Use in Murr v. Wisconsin?

ALI Murr Title Card

One last reminder: next Tuesday, July 25, 2017 at 2:00 pm Eastern, is “The U.S. Supreme Court and Property Rights: The ‘Larger Parcel” Issue and the Future of Regulatory Takings,” ALI-CLE’s first look at the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision on the “larger parcel” or denominator issue in regulatory takings cases where the plaintiff owns more than a single parcel, Murr v. Wisconsin.

Please come and join Sara Beachy, Michael Berger, Steven Eagle, and John Groen for lively and informative analysis and discussion. I will be introducing and moderating the panel. 

Details, including registration and CLE credit information here. Registration is $199, or, if you have attended one of our in-person Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Conferences in the past (the 2018 Conference in set for Charleston, SC, January 25-27, 2018, at the Francis Marion Hotel, stay tuned here for details shortly)…

Continue Reading ALI-CLE: The Larger Parcel Issue and the Future of Regulatory Takings (July 25, 2017)

An unpublished opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in a pipeline case from Virginia. But even though it is not precedent, we’re covering it anyway because it raises important issues.  

In Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC v. 76 Acres, No. 15-2547 (July 13, 2017), Columbia possessed the delegated power of eminent domain. After obtaining the green light from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Columbia instituted an action in federal court under the Natural Gas Act to take easements from several Virginia landowners for a pipeline. Columbia obtained immediate possession of the property (even though there is no provision in the Natural Gas Act for immediate possession, prior to the payment of compensation). 

At trial, the property owners over Columbia’s objection, presented evidence to the jury that what Columbia did on the ground wasn’t the same as what it had formally condemned: 

Columbia sought to…

Continue Reading More Gas From The Fourth Circuit: Federal Jury Can’t Determine Pipeline Company Actually Took More Property Than It Condemned

In Palmer v. Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, No. 1160630 (July 13, 2017), the Virginia Supreme Court concluded that an out-of-state natural gas company has the power under Virginia’s “entry statute” to enter private property to conduct surveys to determine if the land is suitable for condemnation for a pipeline. 

When a property owner turned down Atlantic’s request to come on her land, the company sought a declaratory judgment from the court. The owner asserted that the statute only allowed Virginia public service companies to use the statute, and Atlantic didn’t qualify. She also argued that the statute, if it allows Atlantic to enter, unconstitutionally burdens her right to exclude. The trial court agreed with Atlantic on both arguments. 

The Supreme Court made short work of Palmer’s argument that out-of-state pipeline companies can’t use the statute. Why? The statute itself doesn’t preclude them from doing so. It says…

Continue Reading Virginia: Right To Exclude Doesn’t Include Right To Exclude Potential Condemnors (For Now)

ALI 2018 header

ALI-CLE has posted up the early bird registration page for the 2018 edition of the Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference, to be held January 25-27, 2018 in an exciting new venue, Charleston, South Carolina. 

We are putting the agenda and faculty together for the Conference (which, as always, will include the Condemnation 101 track for those new to eminent domain practice, or who could use a refresher course). There’s a lot going on in our field, and we will put out the details and ALI will update the site once we finalize everything.  

There’s a benefit to early registration: this year’s conference in San Diego was at capacity, and signing up now will both reserve your spot, and get a discounted registration fee. Continue Reading 2018 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain & Land Valuation Litigation (Charleston, SC) Early-Bird Discount Registration Open

Here are links to the cases and materials we spoke about today during our portions of the APA’s 2017 Planning Law Review webinar:

…
Continue Reading Cases And Links From Today’s American Planning Association’s 2017 Planning Law Review

SLG-Invitation-Chair-Reception-NYC-8-11-2017

If my colleagues don’t wise up and change their minds before August, I am slated to become Chair of the ABA’s Section of State and Local Government Law (which, by the way, includes an Eminent Domain Committee, Chaired by Howard Roston, and co-Chaired by Kelly Walsh and John Peloso). On Friday, August 11, at the ABA Annual Meeting in New York City, we’ll be having a party to celebrate, and you are invited. 

Earlier that day, our Section is producing a CLE session about the US Supreme Court’s recent decision in Murr v. Wisconsin, “Murr and Beyond: Implications for Regulatory Takings,” featuring two of the arguing counsel in the case (John Groen (PLF), and Misha Tseytlin (Wisconsin SG), and commentary from me and Nancy Stroud (FL). Judge (ret.) Peter Buschbaum (NJ) is moderating. We’ll not only try and figure out what the majority did in Murr,…

Continue Reading Friday, Aug 11, 2017, New York City: Chair-Elect Reception, Unpacking Murr – ABA State & Local Govt Law Section

There’s a lot of buzz about “what’s next” after Murr v. Wisconsin, and what this case may augur for regulatory takings. There are already quite a few discussions and analysis panels scheduled, including these three in which we’re participating:

…
Continue Reading Your Post-Murr Reading List