Navigation

Archive | Challenging condemnation

October 29, 2013

Eminent Domain Abuse: Seattle to Seize a Parking Lot to Create… A Parking Lot

The City of Seattle has decided to use its sovereign power of eminent domain to seize a parking lot owned by 103-year-old Spokane resident Myrtle Woldson. The Seattle City Council voted Monday to take the lot in connection with its waterfront development, to which it has allocated $30 million. Many residents don’t see a “public benefit” in this exercise of power, because the City is simply going to take the privately owned water front parking lot and turn it into a city owned waterfront parking lot. Woldson has repeatedly refused… read more

By
Posted in Challenging condemnation, Eminent Domain Abuse
Read more > 0

June 19, 2013

Constitution Subcommittee Approves Bill to Protect Private Property Rights

On June 4, 2013, the United States Congressional Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice approved legislation to prohibit state and local governments that receive federal economic development funds from using eminent domain to transfer private property from one private owner to another for the purpose of economic development. The legislation is named the Private Property Rights Protection Act (H.R. 1944) is available here and is a direct response to the 2005 Supreme Court case Kelo v. City of New London, which gave local governments broad authority to seize private… read more

By
Posted in Challenging condemnation, Condemnation Procedures, Eminent Domain Abuse, Future of the law, Legislation
Read more > 1

May 16, 2013

Willets Point Held Entitled to Reimbursement of Legal and Expert Fees

By: Michael Rikon and Jamie Sinclair As a result of a decision by the Honorable Jaime A. Rios of Supreme Court, Queens County, dated April 25, 2013, Willets Point was awarded the reimbursement of attorneys fees and expenses against the City. The EDPL authorizes, in the event that a procedure to acquire property is abandoned (or a court determines the condemnor was not legally authorized to acquire the property), the reimbursement for a condemnee’s actual and necessary costs, disbursements, and expenses (including attorney fees, appraisal fees, engineering fees, and other… read more

By
Posted in Challenging condemnation, Condemnation Procedures, Eminent Domain, New York, Recent cases
Read more > 0

February 21, 2013

An Irrational Public Purpose Taking is Not a Violation of Due Process

By: Michael Rikon Sometimes when you read a case you just want to run head first into a brick wall. That’s the feeling we had when we read the Second Circuit’s recent decision in Matter of 49 WB v Village of Haverstraw in an unpublished summary order. The Second Circuit was reviewing de novo the district court’s granting of summary judgment for defendant-appellees (Village of Haverstraw) and denying 49 WB’s cross-motion for partial summary judgment as to liability. 49 WB argued, based on the Appellate Division’s determination regarding the attempted condemnation of… read more

By
Posted in Challenging condemnation, Eminent Domain, New York, Recent cases
Read more > 0