Most California cases end at the Court of Appeal. That court resolves the majority of civil appeals, and its decisions usually conclude the litigation. In rare situations, a Court of Appeal decision raises an important legal issue or produces an outcome that conflicts with established law. In those cases, a party may seek review by… Read more »
An Assessment by Property Rights Attorneys The Supreme Court has had a hard time deciding exactly when land-use regulations become so extreme as to amount to an unconstitutional “taking” of private property. But the uncertainty reached new heights last term, with the Court’s decision in Murr v. State of Wisconsin. In that case, the Court… Read more »
The US Supreme Court will soon decide whether millions of property owners will maintain the ability to sue the government for regulatory takings arising under the Clean Water Act. Last June, a property owner filed a petition asking the Court to overturn the Federal Circuit Court of Appeal’s opinion in Mehaffy v. United States. In… Read more »
In a unanimous 8-0 ruling, the United States Supreme Court today confirmed that the Fifth Amendment mandates the payment of just compensation for permanent as well as temporary physical invasions of property. Back in 1987, the United States Supreme Court confirmed that just compensation is required for a permanent or temporary regulatory taking in First… Read more »
There are two fundamental sources of property rights protection in the Federal Constitution. The Fifth Amendment provides in part that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. In addition, the due process clause requires that land use laws and regulations substantially advance legitimate governmental objectives. Land use lawyers recognize… Read more »
