Eminent Domain Report

Under Arizona’s Constitution, as under its federal counterpart, a condemning authority may acquire private property if the use to which the acquired property will be put is a proper public use. From the outset of any contemplated acquisition, it is imperative that a governmental entity determine that the purpose for the acquisition will constitute a public use. This article summarizes some of the law governing public use.

A judge must determine that a proposed use is “really public” once an eminent domain action is filed. Ariz. Const. Art. 2, §17; A.R.S. § 12-1132(A). Though ...

When the government approves a private development that diminishes neighboring property values, can a property owner maintain a takings claim?  According to a recent California court decision, the answer is no – governmental approval of a private project cannot trigger inverse condemnation liability. 

Background

In De La Cruz v. City of Los Angeles (2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26413), a new six-story apartment building was being constructed next to the plaintiff’s residence.  The development was approved without a full environmental impact report based on a CEQA exemption for ...

This seems like common sense, but a public agency cannot pursue an inverse condemnation cause of action for damages suffered from its own public improvements. Yet that is exactly what the County of Santa Cruz recently attempted against another local public agency. The Court denied leave to amend to add an inverse condemnation cause of action and left unanswered a significant policy question on whether a public agency can pursue a claim for inverse condemnation at all, or whether inverse condemnation only applies to damages to private (not public) property. … 

A quick overview of Eminent Domain and its use in Texas

The power of eminent domain originates in the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution (Takings Clause). A State’s eminent domain authority is delegated by specific legislatively enacted statutes to state agencies, political subdivisions (i.e. cities, counties and special districts) and even some private entities, which are bound by relevant constitutional restrictions when exercising the power of eminent domain to condemn private property. Condemnation is the legal process that governmental entities and ...

The contours of inverse condemnation liability are often tested by creative California plaintiff’s lawyers. In an opinion earlier this year, one Northern California Federal Court dealt with a novel lawsuit in which the Vichy Springs Resort asserted Federal and state-based inverse condemnation theories against the City of Ukiah arising out the City’s shooting range used to train its police officers (Vichy Springs Resort v. Ukiah).

According to the complaint, guests have been visiting the resort for almost two centuries to take in the curative powers of the carbonated warm ...

Housing in California is a hot topic, particularly when the short-term rentals are thrown into the mix. Those opposed to short-term rentals often argue that it removes permanent housing stock from the market and that such rentals negatively impact communities and reduce surrounding property values due to the temporary character of the residents, constant turn-over, noise and overuse. On the other hand, short-term rentals may be an opportunity to maximize income from one’s property, and many investors purchase properties based on their income-generating potential. …

When the government forces a property owner to sell private property, it is usually done through an eminent domain action (a direct taking), and the government is required to pay just compensation. But what if the forced sale is because the property is a public nuisance (for example, if the property is dilapidated and has code violations) -- does that constitute a taking requiring the use of eminent domain? According to a recent Court of Appeal decision, the answer is no: the forced sale of private property based on public nuisance grounds is within the government’s police powers.

In City of Fontana v. United States Bank (2022 Cal.App. Unpub. LEXIS 2127), a residence was in disrepair and the City sent the owners and their lender a notice and order to repair and abate . . . 

For those of you who missed our recent webinar, "Living on the Edge: Managing Sea Level Rise in California", you can find a recording of the event posted on our website.  My colleagues Ben Rubin and John Erskine provided a great overview of ways to protect existing infrastructure and private property through coastal resiliency, what the models and data are suggesting on the future of sea level rise and the status of pending sea level rise legislation in California. I covered risks and possible solutions for public agencies and property owners, with a focus on how Coastal Commission and ...

When the government requires a property owner to give up private property, the takings clause normally comes into play and the government is required to exercise its power of eminent domain. But is that always the case? According to a recent court of appeal opinion, People v. Gonzalez (Nov. 24, 2020, D077208), there are a number of circumstances in which the government can require a property owner to sell without triggering a taking of private property.

In Gonzalez, a property owner was charged with using his property without a permit or variance and maintaining an unauthorized ...