Navigation

Archive | Inverse Condemnation

November 5, 2018

MORE KNICK ON KNICK V. TOWNSHIP OF SCOTT

We wrote about this case in our September 21, 2018 blog.  The Township of Scott, Pennsylvania passed an ordinance affecting private properties determined to be or contain cemeteries. In relevant part, the ordinance required that “all cemeteries within the Township . . . be kept open and accessible to the general public during daylight hours” and that no owner could unreasonably restrict nor charge any fee to access the cemetery (the “public-access provision”).  Additionally, the ordinance permitted a Township office to enter any property within the Township to determine whether… read more

By
Posted in De Jure Condemnation, Inverse Condemnation, Knick v Town of Scott
Read more > 0

June 1, 2018

ANOTHER UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAKING CLAIM DISMISSED

In our May 11, 2018 blog, we wrote about the Second Department’s affirmance of the dismissal of a claim by Yellow Cab Medallion owners that their property was taken when the City of New York permitted Uber and other for hire vehicles to provide on demand ground transportation. The Court held, inter alia: Moreover, we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that the TLC’s alleged decision to “allow black cars to pick up e-hails” did not, as a matter of law, constitute an unconstitutional taking of the petitioners’ property (see… read more

By
Posted in Inverse Condemnation
Read more > 0

May 11, 2018

ANOTHER FIFTH AMENDMENT CLAIM STRUCK DOWN

          The Second Department held that the City of New York did not take property from taxicab companies that own medallions.  The proceeding arises out of the rapid growth of for-hire vehicle services provided by companies such as Uber which allow passengers to use a smartphone application to electronically request on-demand ground transportation. The Court held, inter alia: Moreover, we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that the TLC’s alleged decision to “allow black cars to pick up e-hails” did not, as a matter of law, constitute an unconstitutional taking… read more

By
Posted in Fifth Amendment, Inverse Condemnation, Regulatory Taking
Read more > 0

September 13, 2017

STORM WATER RELEASES DURING HARVEY WERE ALLEGEDLY UNLAWFUL TAKINGS

Reuters announced that owners of homes flooded during Hurricane Harvey are claiming billions in damages because of Federal and State water releases from storm-swollen reservoirs.  Several lawsuits have been filed in Federal and State Court in Texas and claim properties were taken for public use without compensation.  The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a Texas State agency have been named as the defendants responsible for the water releases.  Damages are estimated to be as high as $3 billion.  There may be more than 1,000 homes valued at between $750,000… read more

By
Posted in Harvey Storm Water Releases, Inverse Condemnation, Temporary Flooding
Read more > 0

June 28, 2017

The Supreme Court rejects a property owner’s regulatory taking claim

The Supreme Court of the United Sates rejected a property owner’s regulatory taking claim in Murr v Wisconsin, 582 U.S. ____ [2017]. The claim alleged that a Wisconsin law deprived the owner of all or practically all of the use of one of two adjacent lots because the lot could not be sold or developed separately under the Wisconsin law. The Court applied a multi-part test to identify the relevant parcel for the regulatory taking inquiry. It concluded that the two lots should be evaluated as a single parcel, and… read more

By
Posted in Inverse Condemnation, Recent cases
Read more > 0