locate an oca lawyer File Amicus Briefs in Property Rights and Taking Cases
Owners’ Counsel lawyers have been and continue to be involved in significant property rights cases in nearly every state and every jurisdiction nationwide. OCA lawyers have either represented property owners directly or OCA itself has participated in the filing of Amicus Briefs in many of the property takings and property rights cases that have been considered by the United States Supreme Court over the past forty years, including:
- Kaiser Aetna v. United States, 444 U.S. 164 (1979);
- Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980);
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Los Angeles County, 482 U.S. 304 (1987);
- Nollan v. Cal. Coastal Comm’n, 483 U.S. 825 (1987);
- Yee v. City of Escondido, 503 U.S. 519 (1992);
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992);
- Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994);
- Preseault v. ICC, 494 U.S. 1 (1986);
- City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd., 526 U.S. 687 (1999);
- Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606 (2001);
- Tahoe-Sierra Pres. Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg’l Planning Agency, 535 U.S. 302 (2002);
- San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City and County of San Francisco, 545 U.S. 323 (2005);
- Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 544 U.S. 528 (2005);
- Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005); and
- Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, 129 S. Ct. 365 (2008).
Process For Requesting an Amicus Brief
OCA’s primary focus is on eminent domain, inverse condemnation and regulatory taking matters, with a particular focus on “right to take” and “just compensation” claims. If you believe that OCA’s voice can aid in the resolution of your case, contact our office at (877) 367-6963 to speak with OCA’s Executive Director.
Recent Amicus Briefs
Memmer v. United States
Memmer v. United States
Owners’ Counsel of America, along with four other national property rights groups recently filed an Amicus Brief challenging the U.S. government’s request to revisit a property owners’ takings claim based on the Trails Act. The groups’ brief noted that several of the court’s rulings dating back two decades established a clear precedent on the matter which the government was clearly seeking to overturn. Established precedent holds that the Trails Act gives rise to a per se physical taking (not a regulatory taking) of a landowner’s private property when the government first invokes section 8(d) of the Trails Act.
more infoTyler vs. Hennepin County
No. 22-166
Geraldine Tyler, age 94, owed Hennepin County $2,300 in unpaid property taxes on her Minnesota condominium. When that small amount ultimately generated $12,700 in fees, the County seized her condo and sold it to pay the taxes and fees. By the time the condo was sold for $40,000, Tyler’s total debt came to $15,000. But the county did not return the excess $25,000 to Tyler. Instead, it pocketed the excess equity in her home.
more infoBridge Aina Le’a, LLC v. Hawaii Land Use Commission
No. 20-54
Developer Bridge Aina Le‘a, LLC, purchased a large tract of land in Hawaii to build hundreds of new homes. Before the company ever got the chance, however, the Hawaii Land Use Commission re‐
Christus Lutheran Church of Appleton v. Wisconsin Department of Transportation
No. 2018-AP-1114
In this case currently before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, OCA addresses important issues arising out of a pre-litigation “jurisdictional” offer made to Christus Church by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation that contained compensation for severance damages to the Church’s
more infoJohnson v. City of Suffolk
Record No. 191563
In this case currently before the Virginia Supreme Court, Virginia oystermen claim that a Sanitation District and the City knowingly operated a sewage and stormwater system in such a way as to discharge wastewater into the Nansemond River, invading oyster beds being leased by the oystermen from the state for the express purpose of oyster cultivation
more infoLech v. City of Greenwood Village
No. 19-1123
After being chased by police for stealing clothing from a Walmart, a man barricaded himself in a house in Greenwood Village, Colorado. Over a 19 hour period, using explosives and a battering ram attached to an armored personnel carrier, the local police department’s SWAT team intentionally destroyed the landowner’s house to force the fugitive to surrender.
more infoKnick v. Township of Scott
588 U.S.
In Knick, the U. S. Supreme Court agreed that property owners are entitled to enforce their right to just compensation in federal court in situations where governmental entities take their property in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
more info
877-367-6963