Here’s one we’ve been meaning to post for a while, the latest in a case we’ve been following. Yes, its the Love Terminal Partners cert petition.

Rather than go into the details about the case, we instead refer you to our post about the Federal Circuit’s opinion, the Court of Federal Claims verdict finding a taking and awarding compensation, and the petition itself. Counsel of Record for the property owners is none other than überlawyer Paul Clement. So we really can’t improve on the Questions Presented:

In 1999, petitioners paid millions of dollars to acquire the lease to property designated for aviation use at Dallas Love Field Airport. The next year, they spent another $17 million constructing a state-of-the-art terminal, and a few years later they expanded their investment by another $6.5 million. At the time, federal law limited flights for aircraft with over 56 seats from Love

Continue Reading New Cert Petition: You Don’t Need Positive Cash Flow To Have Investment-Backed Expectations

Who among us doesn’t possess a lot of goodwill for doughnuts? We know we sure do. 

So when we think of “Los Angeles,” what comes to mind: sunshine, beaches, Hollywood, and sprawl? No. What comes to mind are chili, hot dogs, and doughnuts. Those items — more precisely, the roadside architecture which establishments that hawk these foods employ — just sing “LA” to us. Especially doughnuts.

So the California Court of Appeal’s recent opinion in Los Angeles County Metro. Transit Authority v. Yum Yum Donut Shops, Inc., No. B276280 (Feb. 26, 2019) grabbed our attention. And not just for its spelling of “donut,” because the case involved a donut shop, and the recovery in eminent domain for the loss of business goodwill, two things we love.   

There, the MTA condemned a doughnut — donut — shop in central LA. Store 58 to

Continue Reading Cal App Finds Goodwill For Donuts: Shop Owner Entitled To Loss Of Goodwill Damages, Even Where It Has Not Mitigated The Entire Loss

Thank you to our colleague, economist William Wade, for sending along this piece, reacting to a recent decision by the Massachusetts Appeals Court.

————————

Financial inconsistency bedevils takings decisions

by William W. Wade, Ph.D.

This blog recently reported on a Massachusetts Appellate Court takings case ruling (Smyth v. Conservation Comm’n of Falmouth, No. 17-P-1189 (Feb. 19, 2019)), that reversed a judgment for the plaintiff, in part, based on an erroneous economic impact evaluation under the famous Penn Central test.

Plaintiff inherited a parcel from her parents seemingly purchased in 1975 for $49,000. Plaintiff’s appraiser valued the land parcel at $700,000 with the intended development and $60,000 in its current status as an unbuildable lot. The trial court awarded damages of $640,000.

While other issues were at issue on appeal, the court ruled on the economic impact prong of Penn Central that the diminution in value, $700,000 to $60,000

Continue Reading Guest Post: Financial Inconsistency Bedevils Takings Decisions

Here’s the motion and proposed amicus brief we filed earlier this week, in a case we’ve been following about natural gas pipelines, eminent domain, and immediate possession.

As we noted here, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently concluded that a private condemnor under the Natural Gas Act could obtain immediate possession of property it is in the process of condemning, even though the NGA does not delegate the quick take power. All three judges concluded that this case is “on all fours” with the Fourth Circuit’s earlier decision in East Tennessee Nat. Gas Co. v. Sage, 361 F.3d 808 (4th Cir. 2004), which held that even though Congress did not delegate the quick take power in the NGA, a preliminary injunction under Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure could achieve the same result, and thus there was

Continue Reading New Amicus Brief: Private Natural Gas Act Condemnors Can’t Use Rule 65 Injunctions To Short-Circuit The Straight Takings Process

0124190909_HDR

Here is our annual “proof of life” photo, taken from the dais during the opening session, to prove that all 250 of us were in the room for the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain Conference, and not out on a Palm Springs golf course (it is 72º and sunny, so a golf course would not be a bad place to be).  

Here are the links from our talk this morning (along with Amy Boulris) about the latest issues to watch in eminent domain:


Continue Reading Wish You Were Here: Links From Day 1, 2019 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain And Land Valuation Litigation Conference

Psweather

If you didn’t register to attend the 36th Annual ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference later this week in Palm Springs, California, well then, shame on you!

According to the National Weather Service, while you and the rest of the country is freezing, we’ll be enjoying the balmy desert climes, and discussing the topics we love: eminent domain, redevelopment, relocation, regulatory takings, trial and appeal strategies, doctrinal changes on the horizon, hot topics (border wall, pipelines, wildfires, and flooding), and others. 

Featuring a national faculty (many new to the ALI-CLE dais), and attendees from the entire spectrum of practice, academia, and the bench. 

If you are not joining us, be sure to follow along on the blog (we will post updates daily), and on Twitter (@invcondemnation, @ALI_CLE #EminentDomain2019). And plan on joining us in 2020, when we’ll be in a new city (by

Continue Reading ALI-CLE Palm Springs (72º, Sunny) Here We Come

Pay special attention to Justice Breyer’s questioning of Ms. Knick’s counsel, Dave Breemer. Yes, oral argument is the Court’s time to do with as it wishes, but was Justice Breyer actually trying to get at anything, or just running out the clock with a questions that didn’t seem to have any point. Does he really think that lawyers for municipal governments actually have the type of conversations that he was alluding to? Really? 

Also, if you can’t stream the above, go to the Supreme Court’s audio page for the Knick case and download the sound file directly.  Continue Reading Knick Oral (Re)Argument Recording Available

There’s been a lot written after the Supreme Court heard (re)arguments earlier this week in Knick v. Township of Scott, No. 17-647, most of it helpful in understanding what issues the Justices are considering, and how each of them might break on the ultimate question: should Williamson County be overruled, and should property owners who allege that a local government has taken their property be able to press their claim for just compensation in a federal court? 

Here’s what we’re reading on the subject:


Continue Reading Knick Post-Argument Round Up

Don’t Miss the 2019 Eminent Domain Litigation Conference from American Law Institute CLE on Vimeo.

Check out this sound blurb, produced by the good media folks at ALI-CLE, about the upcoming Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference. (And no, we didn’t record this in a jazz club; although I wish we had.)

There’s still time to register, and come and join us in Palm Springs. Continue Reading Hot (Eminent Domain) Topics, Cool Jazz