For many years, a tenant had a month-to-month lease from Baltimore for a space in one of the city’s public markets. One day, the market sent the tenant an email informing it that it no longer “fit in the [redevelopment] plans,” and that it should “pursue other options.” The tenant took that as “get out.” And instead of digging its heels in, the tenant did what the city instructed and sought “other options.” It left.

The tenant then sued, claiming a taking. It also sought relocation benefits under Maryland’s version of the Relocation Act, which requires “[w]henever a program or project undertaken by a displacing agency will result in the displacement of any person, the displacing agency shall make a payment to the displaced person” for things like moving expenses and the cost of locating a replacement business.

The question the Maryland Court of Appeals determined in Wireless One,

Continue Reading Md On Relocation And Present Participles: Tenant’s Departure After City Told It To Get Out Was “Voluntary”

Today, we’re featuring a post written by our Tennessee colleague, economist William Wade. He writes about the Massachusetts Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Smyth v. Conservation Comm’n of Falmouth, and the more recent cert petition in that case. Bill writes and comments frequently on takings cases. See, e.g., William W. Wade, “Theory and Abuse of Just Compensation for Income Producing Property in Federal Courts: A View from above the Forest,” 46 Tex. Envt’l L. Rev. 140 (2016). 

* * * *

Smyth and Massachusetts’ “New” Penn Central Factor

William W. Wade, Ph.D.

The Massachusetts case, Janice Smyth v. Conservation Commission of Falmouth,[1] is current again. Pacific Legal Foundation lawyer J. David Breemer, filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Breemer’s petition is encyclopedic in its survey of regulatory takings cases, which demonstrates that Penn Central’s

Continue Reading Guest Post: An Economist Looks At Takings Law – Smyth And Massachusetts’ New Penn Central Factor

ALI Nashville 2020

The final agenda and faculty list will soon be officially published, but we wanted to give you a preview of what is in store at the ALI-CLE Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation Conference, January 23-25, 2020, at the Nashville Hilton (downtown, just a few steps away from everything that Nashville has to offer). 

Don’t miss out: in recent years, we’ve been at-or-near capacity, and the conference hotel has even sold out a couple of times. Visit the ALI-CLE website to register and hold your space

Here are some of the things we’ll be discussing: 

  • Making Sense of the New Rules After Knick v. Township of Scott: Where Do I Go, What Do I Do?
  • The Missing Link in Valuing Fixtures
  • When a River Runs Through it: Water Rights and Takings
  • Responding to Project Changes: Valuation When Government Action is Ongoing
  • Property Rights as Civil Rights: Seeking Justice Through


Continue Reading Get Ready: The 2020 ALI-CLE Eminent Domain And Land Valuation Litigation Conference Agenda Coming Soon

Here’s what we are reading this Tuesday:


Continue Reading Tuesday Takings Round-Up: Alien Takings; Zombies; Kelo, Philippines-Style; Kafka

The California Supreme Court’s relatively short unanimous opinion yesterday in City of Oroville v. Superior Court, No. S243247 (Aug. 15, 2019) may have a bigger impact outside of that case than within in.

While that is undoubtedly true in many decisions by a precedential court of last resort, we highlight that here because inverse condemnation is a trending topic in California right now due to the multiple litigations spawned by a series of wildfires, and the City of Oroville case is all about the details of California’s somewhat unique inverse condemnation doctrine.  

Short story is that a dentist’s office flooded with you-know-what when the municipal sewer backed up. Dentists said the City didn’t maintain the sewer (sewer systems are supposed to take crap away in a one-way direction, not return it into habitable spaces). The City for its part argued that if the dentists had only installed the

Continue Reading Cal Supreme Court: Stop Saying Inverse Condemnation Is “Strict Liability”

20180823_102346_HDR

We’re about to get underway with the fall semester at William and Mary Law School, where we’re again teaching an upper-division course, Eminent Domain and Property Rights

We’ve more than doubled the size of last year’s enrollment, so it looks like the word is getting out. We cover not only eminent domain and just compensation, but takings (yes, we have a lot of new materials to cover there), civil forfeiture, a small bit of crossover with land use, local government, and related, property rights as civil rights, how property law is discussed in the public sphere, due process, and how to lawyer up these cases. And in early October, the opportunity to have some of the nation’s best property law scholars “guest lecture” during the Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference. Here’s the official description:

Property rights and the sovereign’s power of eminent domain have been essential components of

Continue Reading Law 608: Eminent Domain And Property Rights – Season 2

Mark your calendars for Thursday, August 22, 2019, 2 – 3pm ET, for a free ABA program, “When the Floods and Fires Come: Landowner’s Property Damage Claims.” This session, produced by the Section of Litigation and organized by our Damon Key colleague Mark Murakami. Featured speakers are our colleagues Anthony Della Pelle (NJ), Kristen Renfro (CA), and Pepperdine lawprof Shelley Saxer (CA).

Here’s the description:

In the wake of the Superstorm Sandy, the 2017 hurricanes, and the California wildfires, landowners damaged by the disasters are faced with a confusing array of potential recovery options. This program is designed to assist small and general practice attorneys whose clients are harmed by these disasters. Anthony Della Pelle, Esq. of New Jersey and Kristen Renfro, Esq. of California will discuss the practitioner’s views and Professor Shelley Saxer of Pepperdine Law School will discuss the legal theories relating to governmental

Continue Reading Upcoming Free Program: “When the Floods and Fires Come: Landowner’s Property Damage Claims”

Merriamscorner

Land users and dirt lawyers know Dwight Merriam. (And if you don’t, you are not really a land user, are you?)

He’s won landmark cases (has even beaten Yours Truly in one of those cases way back in the day). Written tons of articles and books. Edits Rathkopf. Contributes to Nichols. Mentored multiple generations of land use lawyers (me included). All while serving his country in the U.S. Navy. 

Here’s your chance to tap directly into the source. Dwight has (finally) started a blog, Merriam’s Corner, about the topics we all love. 

So sign up and follow. Listen in as Dwight thinks out loud for our benefit.

Welcome to the blog world, Mr. Merriam.  Continue Reading New Land Use Law Blog To Follow: Merriam’s Corner (“Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Land Use”)

Synchronicity (Jung, not The Police). Serendipity. Lattice of coincidence. Whatever you call it, sometimes things seem to come in waves. 

So it seems with the statue of limitations for inverse and regulatory takings claims this week. We had not dealt with the issue for a while. Radio silence. Then boom! The issue crops up repeatedly and we can’t seem to avoid it. First, in a brief we’re drafting in a pending case in the Hawaii Supreme Court. Then in a Federal Circuit opinion yesterday. And also yesterday in an opinion from the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, Harford County v. Maryland Reclamation Associates, Inc., No. 12-C-13-000509 (Aug. 1, 2019). 

MRA bought land way back in 1990 (statute of limitations cases often have a long history, no?) to operate a rubble landfill. But after the purchase, the County changed its regs to prohibit

Continue Reading Lattice Of Coincidence: Regulatory Takings Claim Accrues When Regulator Makes Final Decision (Williamson County Lives!), Not When Appeals Are Exhausted