Newstral
George Sheetz
- Supreme Court Narrows Local Governments’ Ability to Impose Impact Fees – A Potential Sea Change for Californiajdsupra.com
- Supreme Court Decides Sheetz v. El Dorado Countyjdsupra.com
- The Supreme Court Update - April 12, 2024jdsupra.com
- SCOTUS decides case of Calif. homeowner charged $23,000 to build on his own landFox News
- Unanimity Among Justices Rules the Day - SCOTUS Todayjdsupra.com
- Builders may challenge California’s development ‘impact fees,’ Supreme Court rulesLA Times
- 2024 Litigation Look Ahead Series: In Property Takings Cases, Court Must Strike Careful Balancing Act Between Regulating Land Use, Protecting Property Rightsjdsupra.com
- Supreme Court turns down property rights challenge to rent control in New York and CaliforniaLA Times
- Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, California Could be Game Changer for Development Impact Feesjdsupra.com
- Impact Fees at the Supreme Court: How Far Must Government Go to Justify the Fees on a Case-by-Case Basis?jdsupra.com
- Supreme Court Could Open the Door to “Regulatory Takings” Challenges to Regulationsjdsupra.com
- Supreme Court Considers Whether to Expand Constitutional Takings to Legislative Development Feesjdsupra.com
- U.S. Supreme Court Will Clarify the Constitutionality of Legislatively-Authorized Land Use Exaction Feesjdsupra.com
- Are Legislatively Enacted Development Impact Fees on the Chopping Block?jdsupra.com
- Supreme Court Case Will Clarify Constitutionality of Permit Exaction Feesjdsupra.com
- Court Holds That County’s Traffic Mitigation Fee Was Valid Under the California Mitigation Fee Act and Did Not Violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendmentjdsupra.com
- Fuel spill closes part of Batavia Library brieflydailyherald.com
Frequent names
Newstral's extraction of names of people and organisations from the world's news is completely automated. If you do not want your name to appear here, please contact us. We will be happy to look at your request.