State and Local Government Law Commons^™

Pipe(Line) Dreams Post-Denbury Green., Nicholas Laurent, Christopher Oddo

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Denbury Green Pipeline-Texas, LLC v. Texas Rice Land Partners, the Beaumont Court of Appeals articulated the test that should be applied when considering whether the condemnation of private property, which would result favorably for pipeline companies, should be allowed. In Denbury, the Beaumont Court of Appeals balanced the protection of private property rights against the need for true common carrier pipeline companies to condemn private property. The court held that in order to condemn private property, a substantial public interest must exist to justify such condemnation. The Texas Supreme Court, however, reversed the decision of the Beaumont Court of …

A Solution In Search Of A Problem: Kelo Reform Over Ten Years, Wendell Pritchett

All Faculty Scholarship

Kelo is NOT Dred Scott. Kelo is not only NOT Dred Scott, it was, as this Essay will argue, the right decision given the facts of the cases and the current state of legal jurisprudence. As an academic who has detailed the historic exploitation of eminent domain to uproot persons of color in this country, I find it interesting, and somewhat troubling, that the case has received so much criticism, much more criticism, I would argue, than other Supreme Court decisions that deserve condemnation. Certainly, eminent domain, like any other government power, must be regulated carefully. But upending …

A Framework For Understanding Property Regulation And Land Use Control From A Dynamic Perspective, Donald J. Kochan

Donald J. Kochan

Agency Determination Concerning Delegation Of Sovereign's Pipeline Eminent Domain Power To Public Utility Interstate Pipeline Based Upon "Public Need" Comports With Dormant Commerce Clause: Substantial Evidence Review Applied To Public Need Determination: Lakehead Pipeline Company V. Illinois Commerce Commission, S. Ellyn Farley

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Nollan V. California Coastal Commission: You Can't Always Get What You Want, But Sometimes You Get What You Need, Timothy A. Bittle

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Restricting Kelo: Will Redefining Blight In Senate Bill 7 Be The Light At The End Of The Tunnel., Adrianne Archer

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Kelo v. City of New London, the United States Supreme Court extended the public use limitation to its most expansive definition yet. The Kelo decision enhanced the Fifth Amendment takings power by allowing the city of New London, Connecticut, to exercise eminent domain power in furtherance of an economic development plan. Notably, the city’s revitalization plan did not include a claim that the area subject to eminent domain was “blighted.” The Fifth Amendment provides that governments may wield the power of eminent domain and take private property for public use but only with just compensation. Generally, private property can …

The Unable To Agree Requirement And Texas Condemnation Law: A Critical Analysis Of Hubenak V. San Jacinto Gas Transmission Co.., B. Tyler Milton

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Texas, the state constitution requires adequate compensation as a predicate to a taking of private property for a public use. Though an eminent domain cause of action has both a constitutional and statutory basis, the requirement of adequate or just compensation is premised on principles of natural equity and justice. Texas statutorily mandates that a condemner of land must, prior to the institution of a condemnation proceeding, plead and prove the two parties were “unable to agree” on the corresponding compensation due to the landowner. Texas courts interpreted this requirement in the condemnation statute to compel “good faith negotiations” …

Mind The Gap: Expansion Of Texas Governmental Immunity Between Takings And Tort., Jadd F. Masso

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Jennings v. City of Dallas, the city’s wastewater collection division was dispatched to unstop a clogged sewer main but instead caused sewage to spew into the Jennings’ home with dramatic force, causing extensive damage. The Jennings subsequently filed suit against the city, alleging its actions constituted an unconstitutional taking, damaging, or destruction of their property for public use without adequate compensation in violation of Article I, § 17 of the Texas Constitution. The issue presented from the case was whether an individual citizen should be liable for such losses when the damage—as an incident to governmental action—in effect benefits …

Kelo V. City Of New London, Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District V. United States, And Washoe County V. United States: A Fifth Amendment Takings Primer., Christopher L. Harris, Daniel J. Lowenberg

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment is a remedy available to citizens for the government's undue interference with private property rights. It operates similarly to an affirmative defense as it entitles citizens to “just compensation” when the government “takes” private property for “public use.” The Takings Clause thus embodies the idea that society values the protection of private property. The Supreme Court of the United States stated the purpose of the Takings Clause is “to bar Government from forcing citizens from bearing public burdens which, in all fairness, should be borne by the public as a whole.” Kelo v. …

"Public Use" And The Independent Judiciary: Condemnation In An Interest-Group Perspective, Donald J. Kochan

Donald J. Kochan

This Article reexamines the doctrine of public use under the Takings Clause and its ability to impede takings for private use through an application of public choice theory. It argues that the judicial validation of interest-group capture of the condemnation power through a relaxed public use standard in Takings Clause review can be explained by interest group politics and public choice theory and by institutional tendencies inherent in the independent judiciary. Legislators can sell the eminent domain power to special interests for almost any use, promising durability in the deal given the low probability that the judiciary will invalidate it …

Texas Private Real Property Rights Preservation Act: A Political Solution To The Regulatory Takings Problem Comment., George E. Grimes Jr.

St. Mary's Law Journal

Increasing environmental regulation has resulted in an antiregulation backlash and the growth of a property rights movement. Unable to successfully use the courts to protect private property from diminution in value due to government regulations, property rights advocates have looked to the federal and state legislatures for assistance. This has led to some states and the United States Congress to introduce private property rights protection. This protection generally takes one of two forms. The first requires the government to assess the possible effect on property rights before enacting regulations. The second requires the government to compensate property owners for the …