Search for: "Mobile Transportation Co. v. Mobile" Results 1 - 20 of 161
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 May 2011, 1:08 pm by Dawn McIntosh
  In December, an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit upheld the ordinance, rejecting the Guggenheim’s regulatory takings claim finding that none of the three factors for establishing a regulatory taking, set forth Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 9:14 am by Dawn McIntosh
  In this 2-1 decision by Judge Bybee, the Court found that Goleta’s mobile home rent control ordinance caused a facial regulatory taking for which compensation must be paid (under Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
18 May 2011, 1:08 pm by Public BLAWG
  In December, an en banc panel of the Ninth Circuit upheld the ordinance, rejecting the Guggenheim’s regulatory takings claim finding that none of the three factors for establishing a regulatory taking, set forth Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 6:15 am by Yosie Saint-Cyr
Operators will be required to ask passengers who are not using a transportable mobility aid device to vacate wheelchair securement locations, if that securement location is needed by a person using a transportable mobility aid device. [read post]
23 Dec 2010, 11:22 am by Meyers Nave
  The court found that the plaintiffs did not have a regulatory takings claim because none of the three factors for establishing a regulatory taking, set forth Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
16 May 2011, 7:24 am by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
Property owners asked the Court to review the Ninth Circuit's sharply divided en banc opinion, which held that the City's mobile home rent control ordinance did not work a regulatory taking because the fact that the Guggenheims purchased their property subject to a rent-control regime was "fatal" to their investment-backed expectations under Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
8 Jun 2014, 4:00 am by Administrator
… Canadian National Railway Co. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 6:41 am by Hunton & Williams LLP
CLS Transportation Los Angeles LLC, the appeal court affirmed an order to compel arbitration of wage-and-hour claims in light of the 2011 United States Supreme Court case AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
15 Jun 2010, 3:01 am by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
The court found the case ripe under Williamson County, and addressed the merits of the takings claim under the three-factor regulatory taking test of Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2010, 5:09 pm by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
Guggenheim argues that the ordinance, which effects a transfer of nearly 90 percent of the property value from the mobile home park owners to mobile home tenants, constitutes a regulatory taking under Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]