Posts tagged with: "▪-Inverse-condemnation"
Results 561 - 580
of 890
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2013, 9:59 pm
Appellants then filed inverse condemnation claims under article I, § 20 of the Hawaii Constitution and the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, alleging that Maui County had engaged in regulatory takings by depriving their properties of any economically viable use.The Circuit Court dismissed all claims in both cases for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on ripeness grounds. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 9:43 am
By Claudia Gutierrez In MHC Limited Financing v. [read post]
29 May 2013, 11:12 am
County of Alameda, California’s Code of Civil Procedure section 1036 also allows the recovery of “reasonable costs, disbursements, and expenses” including attorney’s fees and costs, as well as other expenses to property owners who prevail in inverse condemnation cases. [read post]
16 May 2013, 3:54 pm
Lockaway subsequently filed a lawsuit against the County for inverse condemnation, along with a writ of mandate to force the County to allow Lockaway's project to proceed. [read post]
2 Apr 2013, 4:04 am
Generally, the case involved an inverse condemnation action filed by a number of property owners against the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, alleging that the City had exacted a regulatory taking by enacting a resolution that precluded the owners from building homes on their vacant lots. [read post]
1 Apr 2013, 5:01 pm
The Court of Appeal also noted that plaintiffs were attempting to "extend the inverse condemnation doctrine far beyond its historical application," as they could not identify a single case "presenting even vaguely similar facts in which an inverse condemnation claim was upheld." [read post]
29 Mar 2013, 10:02 am
The previous owner sued for inverse condemnation, arguing that the government’s action had deprived it of a compensable property interest, namely, the right to repurchase the land. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 7:54 pm
If the landowner is forced to bring an inverse condemnation claim, the property owner is entitled to a reimbursement of attorney's fees, appraisal and engineering fees. [read post]
22 Mar 2013, 10:10 am
They can bring suit for damages due to what is called "inverse condemnation". [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 4:09 am
"That you’re not protected from an inverse condemnation claim just because you aren’t the government": This refers to Pacific Bell Telephone Company v. [read post]
17 Mar 2013, 7:31 pm
But they fail to explain why this is needed; how such detentions would not re-trigger the same international approbation and condemnation that has long accompanied the detentions at Guantánamo; where the detainees would be held; or how they would protect against blowback. [read post]
17 Mar 2013, 8:18 am
These cases are known as "de facto" or "inverse condemnations" and are difficult to prove. [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 12:07 pm
United States (inverse condemnation, unconstitutional taking) * U.S. [read post]
21 Feb 2013, 8:08 am
Finally, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the inverse condemnation claim, noting that the test under federal and state law is practically identical, and the California Supreme Court has expressly rejected an inverse claim on similar facts. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 8:39 am
The plaintiff then brought the present action against the defendants for inverse condemnation and for monetary damages for an alleged violation of the plaintiff’s rights under 42 U.S.C. [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 10:09 am
The period of limitations applying to inverse condemnation actions is that period found in Wyo. [read post]
21 Nov 2012, 8:52 am
However, safety concerns may provide a valid defense to an inverse condemnation claim. [read post]
7 Nov 2012, 3:02 pm
The Court also rejected the owner's inverse condemnation claim, explaining that general regulations restricting the use of property -- such as Caltrans' enforcement of the Outdoor Advertising Act --constitute an exercise of the police power for an authorized purpose and do not constitute takings. [read post]
10 Oct 2012, 8:50 am
David Mendez (4D11-4644), the Fourth District stated: "Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.125, we certify the following question to be of great public importance:Are property owners who have recovered final judgments against the State of Florida in inverse condemnation proceedings constitutionally entitled to invoke the remedies provided in section 74.091, Florida Statutes,… [read post]
8 Oct 2012, 9:30 am
First, the Supreme Court case the opinion piece links to as supporting its claim that "temporary invasions" cannot lead to inverse condemnation liability is Sanguinetti v. [read post]
