By Matthew Hinks The Ninth Circuit has issued a new “chapter in ‘the story of billboards.'” Billboard companies and advertisers should take note of the court’s opinion. Although the opinion refused to extend full First Amendment protection to billboards and advertising related to underlying expressive works, the court — recognizing…
California Land Use Blog
Property Rights and Eminent Domain: Court Overturns Condemnation Victory On Right to Take Where Taking Did Not Result in Landlocked Parcel
By Matthew Hinks In an opinion containing echoes of the United States Supreme Court’s controversial and much maligned decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), the California Court of Appeal has limited the reach of California Code of Civil Procedure § 1240.350(a). That section provides…
Eminent Domain and Inverse Condemnation: Court of Federal Claims Opinions Recognize Limits to Right of Compensation for Less Than Permanent Takings
By Matthew Hinks The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation.” The Constitution does not prohibit the taking of private property by the government — so long as the taking is done…
Los Angeles Superior Court Rules Saudi Prince’s Benedict Canyon Project Was Illegally Subjected to L.A. Building Code Provisions
News Release LOS ANGELES — On August 23, 2012, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that the residential project proposed in the Benedict Canyon area by Saudi prince Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdul-Aziz al Saud, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, had been illegally subjected by the City of Los…
Litigating Property Rights Cases in California: Law Seminars International
by Matthew Hinks Litigating property rights cases in California requires navigating a confusing mélange of sometimes unfamiliar and often times conflicting groups of laws, rules and regulatory agencies. On October 17, 2012, at the Marriott Los Angeles Downtown Hotel, I will be co-chairing an advanced one-day seminar entitled Litigating Property…
Bay Island Club v. California Coastal Commission; Newport Beach Property Owner Succeeds in Invalidating Coastal Commission Permit Condition in Litigation Implicating Regulatory Takings Theories
By Matthew Hinks The California Coastal Commission may not unilaterally impose a right of public access over private property. So says the California Court of Appeal in Bay Island Club v. California Coastal Commission. Bay Island Club (the “Club”) is comprised of 24 shareholders and owners of single-family residences on…
Developers’ Rights and Due Process; Illegal Moratoria Do Not Give Rise to Section 1983 Civil Rights Claims
By Matthew Hinks Consider these facts: A married couple owns waterfront property in a picturesque harbor. They devoutly wish to build a pier or a dock on their property; however, the city refuses to even accept an application for a permit. This is because the city had previously passed and…
Attention Sign Companies and Outdoor Advertisers: New Ninth Circuit Decision Partially Invalidates on First Amendment Grounds Permit Scheme Regulating Commercial Weddings
By Matthew Hinks Sign litigation, especially litigation over the constitutionality of ordinances and regulations affecting signage, often involves familiar, but competing, concepts. Although the courts recognize that outdoor advertising signs are subject to certain protections as “commercial speech” under the First Amendment, municipalities and agencies nevertheless hold significant authority to…
Development Rights and CEQA Challenges: Court of Appeal Upholds 3-Year Tolling Agreement in CEQA Lawsuit – Cause of action governed by a 30-day limitations period
by Matthew Hinks The California Legislature and the courts have recognized that challenges to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), if allowed to drag on, would impede the decisions of public agencies regarding land use. For this reason, CEQA imposes very short limitations periods and requires CEQA cases be given…
Litigant’s Failure to Establish Basis for Property Tax Base Transfer Highlights the Need to Exercise Special Care in Administrative Proceedings to Ensure that Judicial Remedies are Preserved
By Matthew Hinks May a property owner who sells property to a non-governmental entity as part of a government redevelopment project under the threat of eminent domain transfer the tax base of the original property to replacement property? Not on the record presented by the plaintiff in Duea v. County…