¶1 Plaintiff/Appellee, the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT), filed a petition June 17, 2005, to acquire a portion of Defendant/Appellant Hazel Lorraine Evans' (Evans or Landowner) property, through eminent domain for the purpose of improvement and expansion of Highway 20 in Rogers County. Evans filed an exception to the Commissioners' Report on the grounds that it was in derogation of

A jury rejected Mitchell Grobeson‟s claims that the City of Los Angeles (City) and Daniel Watson unlawfully retaliated against Grobeson in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) and Labor Code section 1101 et seq.; that City and Watson unlawfully discriminated against Grobeson and harassed him in violation of the aforesaid statutes; that City constr

This is a land condemnation case. Trend Gathering and Treating, LP condemned a 50-foot permanent pipeline easement and a 20-foot temporary workspace easement across property owned by Laura Moore, in her capacity as trustee of the Laura W. Moore Living Trust. The jury assessed the value of the easement taken at $25, 528 and the damage to the remainder at $222,642. The trial court entered judgmen

On petition of the City of Saratoga an alternative writ of mandate was issued directed to the city clerk of that city to show cause why a peremptory writ of mandate should not issue directing him to give notice of the sale of $2,000,000 of special assessment bonds to be issued under the provisions of the Improvement Act of 1911 for an assessment for improvements to be undertaken under the Municipa

This case arises from two condemnation actions brought by Plaintiff-Appellee County of Hawai‘i (Appellee or the County). In both actions Appellee sought to condemn property belonging to Defendant-Appellant C&J Coupe Family Limited Partnership (Appellant) (1) for use as a public highway (Bypass). (2) 1250 Oceanside Partners (Oceanside), a development company that was to build the Bypass through a

¶1 Defendant Carefree Foothills Homeowners’ Association (the “HOA”) appeals a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff David Vanyo, as trustee for College Book Centers, Inc., 401 Profit Sharing Plan (“Vanyo”). The HOA argues that the trial court erred in denying its motions for judgment as a matter of law (“JMOL”) as to all three of Vanyo’s claims: (1) whether the HOA waived a provision

¶1 BLANCHARD, J. This case raises the question of the procedural steps that clerks of circuit courts are required to take in order to trigger the deadline for a landowner to appeal a just compensation award issued by a condemnation commission. The narrow issue presented is whether a clerk of circuit court needs to comply strictly with the notice requirements in Wis. Stat. § 32.06(8)[1

The State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Department of Transportation sued Donald G. Cooper, Kenneth Jones and Dortha Jones on an eminent domain theory seeking to acquire certain rights, title and interests in property owned by Defendants by condemnation.

Dale Keele, Jim Clark and Jan Gordon were appointed commissioners to make an initial assessment of the damages sustained by Defendants as a resu

The underlying case involves an appeal to the district court from a repair and demolition order issued by the City of San Antonio’s Dangerous Structure Determination Board (“the Board”). The district court remanded consideration of Edward Slavin Sr.’s property back to the Board and affirmed the Board’s order as to Edward Slavin, Jr. and Sheila Slavin (collectively, “the Slavins”).

This consolidated case comes to us on appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgments in favor of the plaintiff-appellee, John W. Costello, Litigation Trustee under the Comdisco Litigation Trust, and against defendants-appellants in an action to enforce certain promissory notes. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part and vacate in part the grants of summary judgment in favor

Charles Costa, as the owner, and Ronald Scott, as his tenant, seek compensation arising from the demolition of a fire-damaged building and the loss of the personalty contained therein. The trial court granted summary disposition in favor of the City of Detroit (the “City”) and F Moss Wrecking Company (“Moss Wrecking”), finding Costa’s and Scott’s claims were precluded by the doctrines

A majority of the court has concluded that the plaintiffs have standing. A separate majority, for differing reasons, affirms the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claim. Parts I and II of this opinion are joined by Judges THOMAS, SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, BYBEE, and IKUTA.

Part III of this opinion, addressing the merits of the plaintiffs’ claim, is a dissent, joined by Judges BY

Melvin Houston (“Houston”) and Houston Synthesized Investments, LLC (“HSI”) appeal from the trial court’s judgment in favor of Christine Ludwick on her claims for (1) breach of fiduciary duty against Houston; and (2) unjust enrichment against Houston and HSI. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

I. Overview

This appeal arises from a jury trial on claims in connection

In this private condemnation action for a non-exclusive access easement across an existing driveway, we are charged with determining what level of specificity a petition for condemnation must contain and whether the trial court erred in excluding valuation evidence based on a particular appraisal method. We review the court of appeals’ decision in Story v. Bly, 217 P.3d 872 (Colo. App. 2008).1

Volunteer Fire Association of Tappan sued County of Rockland on an inverse condemnation theory claiming that the construction of two sidewalk curbs on the Associations property created a safety problem.

Plaintiffs Julie A. DeRossett and Richard A. Sutton appeal from the trial court’s order granting partial summary judgment in favor of Defendant Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. After a careful review of Plaintiffs’ challenges to the trial court’s order in light of the record and the applicable law, we conclude that the trial court’s order should be affirmed.

I. Factual Background

Several owners and former owners of rental properties in St. Paul, Minnesota brought these consolidated actions, challenging the City of St. Paul’s (“the City”) enforcement of its housing code. The property owners appeal the district court’s (1) dismissal of their claims on summary judgment, (2) denial of sanctions for spoliation of evidence, and (3) denial of discovery regarding Appellee

Lower Makefield Township (Township) appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County (trial court) which denied its motion for post trial relief following a jury verdict in this Eminent Domain case. The jury awarded the Dalgewicz family (Condemnees) $5,850,000 as just compensation for the taking of their 166-acre farm (Property) on December 6, 1996, for construction of a golf co

The Supreme Court held in Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, 536 U.S. 765 (2002) (White I), that elected judges, and candidates for judicial office, have a right under the first amendment to declare their legal views to the electorate during their campaigns. The decision left open myriad questions of implementation, and litigation has ensued across the country in those states that give the vo

Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC (“Oncor”) filed an eminent domain proceeding against appellants, Dallas Area Rapid Transit (“DART”) and Fort Worth Transportation Authority (“The T”), to take an easement for an electrical transmission line. Appellants filed a plea to the jurisdiction based on governmental immunity, which, after a hearing, the trial court denied. We reverse the trial

This suit arises out of a surface use dispute between the owners of the JY Ranch, Thomas Ed Cole and Roy Franklin Cole (the Coles), and the operators of a waterflood partially situated on that ranch. The trial court granted multiple motions for partial summary judgment and certified an interlocutory appeal. We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

I. Background Facts

The City of Amherst, Ohio sued Janet and Gerald Eschtruth on an eminent domain theory seeking to acquire by condemnation a few feet of land near an underground pump station off West Ridge Road, then upped the amount to $20,000 to avoid taking the matter to trial after the Eschtruths declined the initial offer and countered with $500,000 for the land. The City renovated a pumping station and in th

¶1 In this action initiated under the Surface Damages Act, 52 O.S. 2001 §§318.2 et seq. (the Act), Appellant, Bays Exploration, Inc. (Bays), appeals from the trial court's Order Granting Attorney's Fees and Costs to Defendant Douglas Jones (Jones). We hold the relief requested by Bays is precluded by the law of the case doctrine and affirm.

¶2 Jones is the surface owner of 140 acres of

Aexco Petroleum, Inc. sued James Niles and Mary Kay Nile on an eminent domain theory seeking to acquire by condemnation certain rights, title and interests from Defendants for its use.

Defendants attacked Plaintiff's right to condemn their property.

Men’s professional tennis is a worldwide enterprise and every year, professional tennis players compete in various tournaments around the world. The principal men’s professional tennis events are the four Grand Slams, the Davis Cup, and the ATP Tour, a worldwide professional tennis circuit organized by the Association of Tennis Professionals (“ATP”). This lawsuit arises out of the reorgani