The bottom line in Hernandez-Castrodad v. Steidel-Figueroa, No. 23-1872 (July 1, 2026), is that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ takings claims, although it had at least partially different reasons than the district court.
First, let’s get to the district court’s reasoning. The takings claim…
“When, then does a government’s delay in issuing a permit or zoning change amount to a taking? Seldom, if ever.” That’s the money quote in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in Rubicon Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. City of Pontiac, No. 25-1631 (June 18, 2026).…
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following. The owners of the trademark of the famous baseball player Roberto Clemente asserted a physical takings claim after the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico used a likeness of Clemente on commemorative license plates, among other things. The First Circuit rejected the takings claim……
Not a lot that’s earthshaking from the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in Sablan v. Commonwealth Utilities Corp., No. 2024-SCC-0023 (June 20, 2026), but we’re posting it because its holding — an entity lacking the power of eminent domain may nonetheless be liable for inverse condemnation — is important because…
July 4, 2026 is the 250th birthday of the United States. Those of us who were around 50 years ago for the bicentennial remember that a very big deal was made of the United States of America’s 200th birthday. The 250th doesn’t seem to be treated as anywhere near such a big deal by the…
Here’s the cert petition (filed yesterday) which asks whether a takings challenge to rent control which is justiciable under Article III (plaintiff has suffered a concrete injury that is fairly traceable to the challenged restrictions, and a ruling will redress that injury) may nonetheless be dismissed because the court believes that if the owner would…
As July gets underway, here’s what we’re reading.…
Here’s the latest in a case we’ve been following, which asks whether Williamson County’s final decision ripeness requirement is limited to takings claims.…
This just in: the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a case from North Dakota (brought by our colleagues Derrick Braaten and the good folks at the Institute for Justice), asking whether attorneys fees are included in just compensation when a private pipeline takes property by eminent domain by using the federal power of…
Newly released: the Federalist Society’s “Courthouse Steps” series covers Pung v. Isabella County, where the U.S. Supreme Court held that “just compensation” for Tyler takings is usually measured by the surplus after a tax sale and not fair market value of the property, unless the tax sale process is unfair or skewed. Here’s…
