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

If you are within striking distance of Madison next month, consider attending the “Property Rights and Land Use in Wisconsin” symposium at the U. Wisconsin Law School. 

This is a one-day conference, and as you might expect, one of the big focuses of the day will be the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Murr v. Wisconsin. The speakers will also cover legislative developments, as well as the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision in McKee v. Fitchburg (which reminds us to get this opinion out of our queue and onto the blog, which we will do shortly). 

Register here (a very modest $100 for the entire day). 

Brochure, U. Wisconsin’s “Property Rights and Land Use in Wisconsin” Symposium (July 20, 2017) 

Continue Reading U. Wisconsin Property Rights & Land Use Symposium (July 20, 2017)

IMG_20170629_100649

Earlier this year, I had the honor of moderating a panel speaking about transportation sharing legal issues at the University of Hawaii Law Review‘s sharing economy symposium. The editors have been hard at work since, and the symposium issue is being printed as we speak.

They also permitted me to pen this little missive, a short essay in which I discuss several recent cases about transportation sharing to illustrate what I see as one of the problems with how regulatory takings claims are framed. 

This essay will review several cases which the sharing economy has thus far produced, cases where taxicab companies have sued municipalities for allowing ridesharing services to operate without medallions, most often employing a regulatory takings theory. I argue that the approach employed by these courts wrongly focus on the property interests involved, rather than where the real analytical question resides: what are the investment-backed expectations

Continue Reading New Article: “Property” And Investment-Backed Expectations In Ridesharing Regulatory Takings Claims

IMG_0006

Here’s the Honolulu Star-Advertiser latest story on the Honolulu rail authority’s condemnation of the property of Blood Bank of Hawaii, “Blood bank sues over city push to take land for rail.” 

The state’s lone blood supplier is pushing back in court against the city’s efforts to acquire the land fronting its Dillingham Boulevard offices for rail.

In a countersuit filed Thursday, the Blood Bank of Hawaii accuses the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation of acting “in bad faith” and “recklessly subjecting Hawaii’s blood supply to grave but unnecessary risks.”

It further questions the benefit of taking the parcel when the city still lacks the funds to build the full 20-mile line to Ala Moana Center.

Full details here, in our Answer and Counterclaim. 

Blood Bank Counterclaim by Honolulu Star-Advertiser on Scribd

Continue Reading Not Satisfied With Merely Taking Land For Rail, Now The City Wants Blood

What to make the Justice Kennedy-authored 5 justice majority opinion in Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214 (June 23, 2017)? 

There, the majority adopted — maybe “created from whole cloth” would be a more accurate description — a multifactor test for determining the “larger parcel’ or “denominator” in regulatory takings cases where the owner possesses more than a single parcel of land.  We quoted the opinion’s list in this post, and won’t repeat it entirely here, but below is a short list of things that now must be considered by lower court judges (not juries) when they are deciding how much of the property the plaintiff owns can be used to measure the impact of the regulation on the parcel which she claims was taken:

  • The “treatment of land.” Yes, the actual metes-and-bounds of the legal parcel, but also, get this, the “expectations … an acquirer of land must


Continue Reading Justice Kennedy’s Social Justice Warrior Test For Takings Clause “Property” In Murr v. Wisconsin

Update: Here are my first thoughts on Murr – “Justice Kennedy’s Social Justice Warrior Test for Takings Clause Property in Murr v. Wisconsin

Lot-lines-color-2

The title alone should tell you this was authored by Justice Kennedy, which means that, as we thought it might do, today the U.S. Supreme Court held in Murr v. Wisconsin, No. 15-214 (June 23, 2017) that in determining the “denominator” in regulatory takings cases — in other words, what “property” owned by the plaintiff is the claimed diminution in value of the taken property compared — that “a number of factors” make up the inquiry, including: (1) “the treatment of the land, in particular how it is bounded or divided, under state and local law” (i.e., title); (2) the “physical characteristics” of the property (your guess is as good as ours); and (3) the “value of the property under the challenged regulation”

Continue Reading SCOTUS, 5-3 Affirms Murr By Penn Centralizing Parcel As A Whole Analysis, Which Must Consider “A Number of Factors”

As readers may be aware, I’ll be taking over as Chair of the ABA’s Section of State and Local Government Law in a couple of months. I understand that many of my colleagues do not see the value in ABA participation, and I’ve explained why I do so here. It’s been a wonderful way for me to meet colleagues from around the nation, develop professional skills, learn about areas of law which I should know but do not practice. In short, it’s made me a better lawyer. If you aren’t participating, you really should consider it.  

We sent out a call for leaders this morning via email, and I’m reproducing it here for those of you who may be interested in joining our little enterprise but who didn’t get the email. 

Come, join us

* * * *
Volunteer! Network with colleagues! Develop professional strengths, add to

Continue Reading State & Local Govt Law Section Is Looking For Leaders

Here’s the audio recording of the talk we gave to the ABA Section of State and Local Government Law’s Land Use Committee earlier today. (Some of you may note that in the intro we say the talk was on “June 17,” but since that’s tomorrow, we assume you understand that is just an error.)

The links to the cases and materials we mentioned in the talk are posted hereContinue Reading Recording – “Takings: Emerging Issues” ABA State & Local Government Law Section Talk

Update: the audio recording is posted here.

* * * *

Here are the links to the cases we mentioned in today’s ABA State and Local Government Law Section presentation, “Takings: Emerging Issues.”

The “Larger Parcel” In Regulatory Takings (and Eminent Domain)

Emerging Issues


Continue Reading Links From Today’s ABA Presentation – “Takings: Emerging Issues”