After Knick Ruling, Calif. Suit Is Testing Federal Court Waters

Law360 (October 4, 2019) A California property owner is taking claims that the government has taken value from hundreds of acres of land to federal court, a move allowed by a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, and lawyers say although they're not sure the suit is viable, they expect to see more similar federal filings. Knick v. Township of Scott overturned an earlier Supreme Court decision that had required plaintiffs in takings cases to receive an unfavorable judgment at the state court level prior to filing in federal court, and experts say the change has the potential to level the playing field for property owners, who are often more successful suing local governments in federal court. Rick Friess of Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP, which represents the plaintiff in the case, told Law360 his client went to federal court shortly after the Knick decision thinking federal court would be a more favorable forum than state court, and while lawyers agree that more plaintiffs will follow suit, experts question whether this particular California landowner will be able to prevail in federal court. "It definitely is the case that there is a local connection between the state court judges and the county supervisors. That doesn't make for a fully level playing field. We're suing Riverside County in Riverside County Superior Court," Friess told Law360 in a recent interview. The plaintiff is represented by Friess and Kelsey Mills of Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. Read More (subscription required)