Updates on cases, laws, and other topics of interest to local governments

Subscribe by Email

Enter your Email:
Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

Subscribe in a Reader

Follow Municipal Minute on Twitter


Blog comments do not reflect the views or opinions of the Author or Ancel Glink. Some of the content may be considered attorney advertising material under the applicable rules of certain states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Please read our full disclaimer

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

New Takings Article Answers the Question - Are Raisins Property for Purposes of a Takings Claim?

Check out the recently published article by Robert Thomas on regulatory takings law, "Recent Developments in Regulatory Takings Law:  What Counts as “Property," 34 Zoning & Planning Law Report 1 (Thomson West 2011).  You can read the entire article on the author's blog, Inverse Condemnation.  The article takes an interesting look at unique takings claims around the country, such as whether a court-appointed attorney’s services is property for purposes of a takings claim in South Carolina  (spoiler alert: it is) or whether a set-aside requirement for raisin producers is an unconstitutional takings in California  (it is not).


Post a Comment