Murr v. Wisconsin: How Does the Supreme Court Define Property in Takings Litigation?

(290 Ratings)

Produced on: March 05, 2018

Course Format On Demand Audio

Taught by

Categories:

Course Description

Time 60 minutes
Difficulty Intermediate

Claims for just compensation under the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause (and its state law counterparts), which are sometimes called “inverse condemnation” claims, present a variety of complex and fact-intensive issues. One of the most fundamental is how to define the “property” that a court should consider when determining whether a compensable taking has occurred. Surprisingly, until last June’s decision in Murr v. Wisconsin the U.S. Supreme Court had never addressed this important question. Although the Court had said several times that in addressing takings claims courts must consider “the parcel as a whole,” the meaning of that phrase remained unclear, and lower courts had struggled to define it. In Murr, the Court finally provided significant guidance regarding how to define the property that the Takings Clause protects. But it remains to be seen whether lower courts find that guidance sufficient to clarify the rather muddled case law that had built up in the years preceding Murr.

Attorney Jerry Stouck is a nationally-recognized expert in Fifth Amendment takings cases. In addition to litigating such cases, he frequently speaks and writes on takings and other property rights issues. The federal government asked the Supreme Court to hear one of his takings cases along with Murr. Although the Court eventually denied cert. in that case, its long history – and relationship to the property definition issues the Court addressed in Murr – has given Jerry the opportunity to analyze and reflect on Murr’s  significance to the overall body of takings jurisprudence. He will provide not only an informed understanding of the Murr decision, but also a critical look at what Murr leaves open for further litigation in this complicated and evolving area of law.


Learning Objectives:

  1. Identify the “parcel as a whole” or “relevant parcel” issue, and why it is so important in takings cases, particularly those involving real property
  2. Review the several previous Supreme Court decisions that have touched on this important issue, but have served only to obscure (rather than promote) its resolution
  3. Appreciate the varied and conflicting approaches that lower courts have taken to the relevant parcel issue
  4. Obtain a thorough understanding of the decision in Murr v. Wisconsin, as well as the dissent’s criticisms of it
  5. Recognize the issues that Murr leaves open for further litigation as courts attempt to apply Murr in diverse situations

Faculty

Jerry Stouck

Greenberg Traurig, LLP

Jerry Stouck has more than 35 years of trial and appellate litigation experience in a wide range of cases and courts. He has particular experience in complex business, regulatory and environmental disputes with government agencies, and is Chair of the firm's Federal Regulatory and Administrative Law practice group.  Jerry regularly challenges federal agency action under various regulatory regimes, and has represented the lead parties in several very large and important cases seeking monetary relief from the federal government. He also handles environmental and land use litigation, including related contract/commercial disputes, and has extensive experience with eminent domain and Fifth Amendment regulatory takings claims. Jerry appears frequently in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and Federal Circuit, in the D.C. federal district court and D.C. Circuit, and in other trial and appellate courts across the country.


Reviews

RG
Richard G.

Relevant and timely. Well-presented.

WB
William B.

Well done.

PC
Pamela C.

Interesting!

JB
joseph b.

Exceptionally well done. The instructor took esoteric material and made it understandable.

DL
David L.

A through discussion of defining points in regulatory takings law.

RW
Richard W.

I have recommended

TM
Tammie M.

Great info. Knowledgeable presenter.

CM
christopher m.

One of the better presentations. Useful for any land use practitioner.

KW
Kevin W.

Wow! Does this guy know his stuff! (That's not the most eloquent comment I've ever made but I think it is quite accurate.)

HJ
Hilary J.

Well presented.

AM
Antoine M.

Excellent, professional presentation by attorney and moderator.

Load More

$59

$ 59 Real Estate and Environmental Law In Stock

Accreditation

Get Unlimited Access to Lawline Courses

Unlimited CLE Subscription gives you access to take almost any course from our catalog and earn as much CLE credit as you need.