Upload
inversecondemnation
View
1.108
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
slides from the 10-21-2010 webconference "Eminent Domain After Kelo" (U Conn - Center for Real Estate)
Citation preview
Schlimmbesserung:Eminent Domain for
Redevelopment
Robert H. Thomas
www.inversecondemnation.com
“To worsen by improvement”
public use?
Berman (1954)
Blight the baby with the bathwater
“when the legislature has spoken, the public interest has been declared in terms well-nigh
conclusive”
Berman, 384 U.S. 34-35
Midkiff (1984)
Eminent domain like zoning – just another land use tool
Kelo (2005)
“Economic development” might be a public use
Kelo dissenters (2005)
Economic development alone is never a public use
Kelo (2005)
pretext to hide private benefit is not “public use”
Kelo (2005)
“pretext” =
actual motive
Berman - unanimous
Kelo – 5-4
Midkiff - unanimous
“Kelo” = Abuse
“Kelo”
“Kelo”
= Incompetence
= Property Rights
Franco v. National Capital Revitalization Corp.
930 A.2d 160 (D.C. 2007)
County of Hawaii v. C&J Coupe Family Ltd Partnership
198 P.3d 615 (Haw. 2008)
208 P.3d 713 (Haw. 2009)
New York -
49 Wb, LLC v. Village of Haverstraw
516 F.3d 50 (2d Cir 2008)
cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 2964 (2008)
Goldstein v. NY State Urban Dev Corp.
921 N.E.2d 164 (N.Y. 2009)
Goldstein v. Pataki
44 A.D.3d 226 (2007)
“[T]he record amply demonstrates that the neighborhood in question is not blighted, that whatever blight exists is due to the actions of the City…and that the justification of underutilization is nothing but a canard to aid in the transfer of private property to a developer. Unfortunately for the rights of the citizens affected by the proposed condemnation, the recent rulings of the Court of Appeals …have made plain that there is no longer any judicial oversight of eminent domain proceedings.”
Uptown Holdings, LLC v. City of New York,
No. 2882 (App. Div. Oct 12, 2010)
Tuck-it-Away v. N.Y. State Urban Development Corporation
…cert granted? denied?
Schlimmbesserung?
Schlimmbesserung?