Contact Us
Categories
- Fractional Investment
- Section 1031 transactions
- Investment
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Kentucky minimum wage
- Minimum wage
- Arbitration
- Breach
- Closing
- Closing Disclosure
- Good Faith Estimate
- HUD-1 Settlement Statement
- Lenders
- Truth in Lending Act
- “Know Before You Owe”
- Condemnation
- Dodd-Frank Act
- Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs)
- Mortgage
- Reverse mortgages
- Zoning Regulations
- Affordable Housing
- Commercial Real Estate
- Economic Development
- Land Use Law
- Landlord
- Lease
- Planning and Zoning
- Purchase Contract
- Real Estate Law
- Tenant
- URLTA
- Homeowners Association
- Property Titling
- Rescission
- Same-Sex Couples
- Agritourism
- Deed
- Drones
- Land Surveys
- National Association of Realtors (NAR)
- plat
- Property Lines
- Property Survey
- Real Estate Agents
- Rural Areas
- Commercial Lease
- Condominium
- Deeds
- Exclusive Use Clause
- Horizontal Property Law
- Kentucky Condominium Act
- KRS 383.500
- LBAR
- Loans
- Overlay Zoning
- Steenrod v. Louisville Yacht Club Association
- Title Insurance Policies
- Trulia
- Uncategorized
- Zillow
- Benningfield v. Zinmeister
- Boards of Adjustment
- Building Inspection
- Co-Signing
- Code Enforcement
- Conditional uses
- Credit Report
- Credit Score
- Dog owners
- Emergency Preparedness
- Emotional Support Animals
- ESIGN
- Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
- FICO
- Homebuyers
- Inspection
- Insurance Companies
- Insured
- KRS §258.235(4)
- KRS §383.580
- Multi-unit properties
- Natural Disasters
- Occupancy Fraud
- Screening
- Security Deposit
- Servicers
- The Loan Estimate form
- Truth in Lending Statement
- U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
- Variances
- Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
- "Right-of-Way Agents"
- Bluegrass Pipeline
- Boilerplate Language
- Conservation Easement
- Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”)
- Easement
- Eminent Domain
- General Forms
- Kentucky landowners
- Power of Attorney ("POA")
Showing 1 post in U.S. Supreme Court.
Regulatory Takings Cases and the Relevant Parcel: Murr v. Wisconsin
This summer, in Murr v. Wisconsin,[1] the United States Supreme Court will make an important decision on property rights and regulatory takings under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. At issue in the case is whether two legally distinct parcels of land can be treated as one for regulatory purposes if they share common ownership. In a time when planning and zoning regulations change sporadically, this case has broad implications for owners of commercial property, farmers, developers, mining operations and others that hold legal title to adjoining properties, so these groups should pay particular attention to this case.
[1] Murr v. Wisconsin, 359 Wisc. 2d 675 (Wis. App. 2014), rev. denied, 862 N.W.2d 899 (Wis. 2015) More >