Articles

In addition to Corps v. Hawkes and Kent Recycling v. Corps, Pacific legal Foundation has a third case that has been "relisted" and is being given serious consideration for a grant of certiorari.  Under the current procedure, the Supreme Court of the United States often relists a case for the next conference if it is a case that the Court is poten ...

For almost 25 years since Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, it has been well established that government agencies commit an unconstitutional taking when their regulations deprive a property owner's land of "all economically viable use." But when a property owner owns two or more adjacent legal parcels, courts have split on whether the govern ...

Property Rights -- Coy Koontz gets paid!!!!  In the "you can't get something for nothing" category, the St. Johns Water Management District finally paid the Coy Koontz estate $602,000 for the temporary taking of the Koontz property. While it was only 22 years late, Coy Koontz has finally been vindicated. As you recall, we took Koontz v. St. Joh ...

Pacific Legal Foundation today filed its Petitioners' Brief on the Merits in this case pending before the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court granted review on January 15th, 2016, and oral argument will be held in early October. A specific oral argument date has not yet been set.  A copy of the Petition is here, and the Merits Brief is h ...

Yesterday, eleven separate briefs representing over 30 entities were filed in the Supreme Court of the United States in support of the Murrs in this high profile regulatory taking case. Of particular note, the State of Nevada was joined by eight other states, pointing out that "Amici States' interest is at its apex here" and that the rule adopted ...

caption id="attachment_41480" align="alignright" width="229" Government won't pay the Murrs after taking the family's lot on the left because the family also owns the lot on the right./caption Many briefs filed in Murr at the Supreme Court After we filed our opening brief in Murr v. Wisconsin, we received a large number of amicus briefs in s ...

caption id="" align="alignright" width="148" PLF Interim President and CEO John Groen/caption Robin Bravender covers the Supreme Court and lower federal courts beat for Greenwire, and she usually captures the details that others miss. This week she previewed important cases the Supreme Court will consider next term, and Bravender focused on a nu ...

The Supreme Court of the United States today received PLF's Reply Brief on the Merits in Murr v. Wisconsin, filed on behalf of the Murr family. The case is now fully briefed, and ready for scheduling oral argument. It is expected that the Court will soon set an oral argument date, most likely in November. This case presents a long-standing and dif ...

While we do not yet have a date set for the oral argument before the Supreme Court in Murr v. State of Wisconsin, we now have, hot of the presses, an article by former PLF attorney (and current judicial clerk) Chris Kieser on what to expect from the Supreme Court when it does hear the case. This is the case, of course, where the Murrs are not allow ...