BLOG: Condemnation Law
Crossing the Line? Nebraska Plans to Use Eminent Domain to Take Land in Colorado
We often think of eminent domain as the inherent power of the government to take private land for a public purpose. But what about when one sovereign entity intends to take land from another? Let’s look at a recent interstate taking story from the Nebraska-Colorado border, where Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts plans to use Nebraska’s... Read More
How Can A Taking By Eminent Domain Affect Your Taxes?
Having your property taken from you against your will can be difficult by itself, but losing your property and paying additional taxes after the property is taken is a harsh reality that many property owners face when confronted with eminent domain. In a prior blog post, we explained that the government has the inherent right... Read More
East Orange Resident Faces an Uphill Battle After a Surprise Tax Foreclosure
Buying, owning, and securing property can be one of the most monumental and emotionally taxing periods in a person’s life. As John Adams once noted, “[p]roperty must be secured, or liberty cannot exist.” Discourses on Davila, in 6 Works of John Adams 280 (C. Adams ed. 1851). These principles are woven throughout the story of... Read More
Penn. High Court: Eminent Domain Power Not Required For Liability in Inverse Condemnation Action
In late November 2021, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court addressed a rather interesting question regarding inverse condemnation liability in Hughes v. UGI Storage Co., et al., No. J-69A-2021 (Nov. 29, 2021). There, the Court sought out to answer whether, to be held liable for damages under Pennsylvania’s inverse condemnation statute, an entity must be clothed with... Read More
What Is The Difference Between “Eminent Domain” & “Condemnation?”
While the terms “eminent domain” and “condemnation” are often used interchangeably, their true meanings may come as a surprise to most. Eminent Domain Vs. Condemnation Eminent domain is the inherent right or power of the government to “take” private property for public use. The New Jersey Supreme Court has noted that the right of... Read More
What Can NJ Property Owners Expect from President Biden’s $1.2 Trillion Infrastructure Bill?
On November 15, 2021, President Joe Biden signed a $1.2 trillion federal infrastructure bill (the “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act”) that provides New Jersey with an estimated $12.3 billion in funding over the next five years to revitalize the state’s dilapidated roads, railways, bridges, and tunnels. While widespread infrastructure repair is long overdue in New... Read More
Making Amends: California Decides to Return Bruce’s Beach Almost a Century After the Pretextual Condemnation
In late September 2021, California’s Gov. Gavin Newsom, signed a law authorizing Los Angeles County to return a beach property taken by eminent domain back to descendants of the original property owners. The property, widely known as Bruce’s Beach, was originally bought by Willa and Charles Bruce in 1912 and quickly became a thriving retreat... Read More
Gym Owner Loses Challenge to COVID Shutdown Order
A New Jersey kickboxing business owner was recently denied compensation for the closure and limitations placed on its business under COVID-19 “shutdown” orders signed by Governor Phil Murphy. The business, JWC Fitness, LLC, based in Franklin, New Jersey, shut its doors in March 2020 in compliance with Murphy’s Executive Order 104, thereby closing its business... Read More
Michigan Supreme Court Allows Flint Water Crisis Victim to Assert an Inverse Condemnation Claim
From 1964 through late April 2014, the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (“DWSD”) supplied Flint, Michigan residents with water from Lake Huron. On March 28, 2013, the State Treasurer recommended to the Governor that he authorize the plan to construct an alternative water supply system. Thereafter, on April 16, 2013, the Governor authorized a process... Read More
6th Circuit Rules “Tree Ordinance” Requiring Trees Be Replaced Or Pay A Fine Resulted In Unconstitutional Taking
A recent 6th Circuit Court of Appeals decision determined that a tree ordinance resulted in an unconstitutional taking. The ordinance required any removed trees to be replanted or else pay a fine. The suit, filed by F.P. Development against Charter Township of Canton, Michigan challenged the Ordinance claiming that, inter alia, it constituted a taking of... Read More
