Inverse Condemnation Litigation: Strategies for Municipal Attorneys for Avoiding and Defending Taking Claims

Leveraging Affirmative Defenses; Mitigating Damages, Attorney's Fees and Costs

Recording of a 90-minute CLE webinar with Q&A


Conducted on Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Program Materials

This CLE webinar will provide guidance to municipal attorneys for avoiding and defending inverse condemnation claims brought by property owners alleging the government’s actions or inaction constitute a “taking” of private property without just compensation. The panel will discuss how courts are ruling in inverse condemnation cases and effective tactics for avoiding and defending against claims and mitigating costs and attorneys’ fees.

Description

Property owners have become more aggressive in challenging the government’s exercise of eminent domain over their private property. Municipalities defending inverse condemnation actions must navigate a complicated area of the law and face the potential for significant litigation expenses.

To prevail in inverse condemnation claims, property owners must prove that they were deprived of all or substantially all economically beneficial use of their property by the government’s direct action or inaction, or prove the government’s action has substantially impacted the value of their property by thwarting a reasonable investment-backed expectation. Prevailing property owners are entitled to recover damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. Attorneys’ fees can exceed the amount of the damages award.

Municipalities defending inverse condemnation claims should put forth all reasonable affirmative defenses, including proper exercise of police power not subject to compensation, plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies, plaintiff’s waiver of rights to object or receive compensation, and the expiration of the statute of limitations, which tends to be relatively short in inverse condemnation cases based on a regulatory taking.

Listen as our authoritative panel discusses the latest developments in inverse condemnation litigation, how courts are ruling in these cases, and best practices for municipal attorneys for defending and avoiding claims.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. Latest trends in inverse condemnation actions
  2. Common bases for inverse condemnation actions
  3. Effective strategies for defending claims
  4. Limiting attorneys’ fees and costs
  5. Best practices for avoiding or minimizing actions

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • What types of government actions or inaction typically lead a property owner to file an inverse condemnation lawsuit?
  • What defenses have been effective for municipalities defending against inverse condemnation actions?
  • What are some best practices for municipalities to avoid or minimize inverse condemnation lawsuits?

Faculty

William E. Adams
William E. Adams

Partner
Nossaman

Mr. Adams has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in more than 45 trials and binding arbitrations, as well as...  |  Read More

June S. Ailin
June S. Ailin

Partner
Aleshire & Wynder

Ms. Ailin has represented public agencies in a wide variety of litigation and transactional matters since...  |  Read More

Mary Colchin Johndroe
Mary Colchin Johndroe

Partner
Cantey Hanger

Ms. Johndroe vigorously represents clients in civil litigation, including construction, contract, eminent domain,...  |  Read More

Other Formats
— Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include program handouts. To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video

$297

Download

$297