Marzulla Law Blog
No “Patch of Heaven” for This Flooded Plaintiff
Whether the flooding of private land results in a judgment of Fifth Amendment taking in the United States Court of Federal Claims depends on what evidence the Plaintiff offers to prove that the Government caused the flooding. The taking case brought by Ministerio Roca...
A Case of Mistaken Identity in a Rails-to-Trails Case
William C. Hardy and Bertie Ann Hardy own eleven of 156 parcels included in a request to abandon a rail line in Newton County, Georgia submitted by the Central of Georgia Railroad to the Surface Transportation Board. Unfortunately, the Railroad had mistakenly...
Taking Claim Dismissed for Property Owner’s Misconduct
Paul and Ann Nix own real property next to a railroad line in Marion and Hamilton Counties, Indiana. Following the conversion of the railroad line into a recreational trail under the National Trail Systems Act, they brought a rails-to-trails taking suit against the...
Bankruptcy Trustee Allowed to Sue State for a Taking in Bankruptcy Proceeding
Venoco, LLC operated a drilling rig off the coast of Santa Barbara, California. Following a pipeline rupture in 2015, Venoco could not get its oil and gas to the market, and ultimately was forced to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2017. At first, the California...
Federal Circuit Rejects Taking Claim on Nature of Property Right— Not Police Power Theory
The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in a taking case involving bump-stock-devices. This decision warrants close attention because in it the Federal Circuit did not adopt the police power argument advanced by the Government and used by the trial court to...
Court Approves 5% ($185M) Contingent Attorneys Fee Award
The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has often been less than generous in its awards of attorneys’ fees, and rarely awards the full amount of fees petitioned for. Recently, however, the Court in Health Republic Insurance Company v. United States, awarded the full...
Procedural Trap for the Unwary Taking Litigant
Few procedural rules facing litigants in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims are as badly maligned as 28 U.S.C. § 1500. Referred to simply as “Section 1500” by seasoned practitioners, the provision has been called “outdated and ill-conceived,” “an anachronism,” and “an...
Are Expert Reports Really Hearsay? It’s time for a Fresh Look at the Admissibility of Expert Reports
For trial witnesses offering opinion testimony under Federal Rules of Evidence 702, 703, or 705, Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires the witness to prepare and disclose to the opposing counsel a written report that contains a complete...
IRS Loses Motion to Dismiss Whistleblower Contract Claim
John Doe served as a confidential informant for the IRS in a criminal payroll and corporate income tax evasion investigation. Doe claims that IRS agents promised to pay him a reward of 15% of any taxes collected because of information he provided to them about his...
Government Inaction Can’t Give Rise to a Taking, Federal Circuit Holds
On August 30, 2019, Bench Creek Ranch, LLC, owned by Paul Plouviez, sued the United States in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, seeking over $800,000 in just compensation for the taking of the Ranch’s water rights in federal land covered by Bench Creek’s grazing...
Your Guide on How to Protect Your Rights in Federal Takings and Inverse Condemnation Actions
Are you facing a taking from the government? Need to understand what a taking is and what you can do about it? Read our Takings Law Guide.