Search for: "State v. Parcel"
Results 21 - 40
of 1,932
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Mar 2007, 1:27 am
Krauser.John Ellwood Hinebaugh devised a large parcel of land to the Sebolds provided they, among other things, did not alienate their interest in the property and continued to farm it. [read post]
13 Mar 2013, 9:00 am
Hansen Lost Tree Village Corp. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2014, 9:06 pm
In Allen v. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 6:06 am
Here is the opinion in State v. [read post]
6 Apr 2017, 8:35 am
The question before the Supreme Court is whether, in a regulatory taking case, the “parcel as a whole” concept as described in Penn Central Transportation Company v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 3:14 pm
The plaintiff in McColgan v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 3:14 pm
The plaintiff in McColgan v. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 8:40 am
Here is the 200+ page order in State of New York v. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 3:14 pm
Recently, a California Court of Appeal decision clarified the specificity needed in terms of real estate when filing a Heggstad petition.Ukkestad v. [read post]
5 Nov 2022, 7:57 pm
City of Arnold v Dickhaner, LLC, 649 S.W. 3d 340 (Mo. [read post]
14 Mar 2015, 10:07 pm
Glick v. [read post]
30 Aug 2021, 8:20 am
An excerpt: In 2017, the National Indian Gaming Commission determined that a parcel of land in Iowa that is held in trust by the United States for the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska is eligible for gaming. [read post]
25 Jun 2017, 8:21 pm
Murr v. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 8:50 am
The question before the United States Supreme Court was whether, in a regulatory taking case, the “parcel as a whole” concept as described in Penn Central Transportation Company v. [read post]
5 Dec 2014, 5:00 pm
United States Whitfield v. [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 1:48 pm
Appealed from the United States Court of Federal Claims. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 1:16 pm
The California State Lands Commission (the Lands Commission) appeals the district court's final judgment in this eminent domain case, wherein the United States took a fee simple interest in about 32.42 acres of land (the Property) on behalf of the Navy, which has continuously leased this parcel since 1949. [read post]
17 Jan 2016, 7:06 am
State of Wisconsin (Docket Number 15-214). [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 10:00 pm
In EEOC v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 10:00 pm
In EEOC v. [read post]
