Archive for October 7th, 2007
Virginia Supreme Court Finds that the “Locality” and the “Board” are Not the Same for Purposes of Naming Necessary Parties to a Lawsuit
Posted by: Patty Salkin on October 7, 2007
LAW OF THE LAND
A blog on land use law and zoning
Subscribe to this Blog by Email
- Click here!
Contact the Author
- Click here.
For the Author’s Publications
- Click here to visit her SSRN site.
Categories
- Accessory Uses (14)
- ADA (5)
- Adult Entertainment Facilities (44)
- Affordable Housing (29)
- Agricultural Uses (24)
- Amending Zoning (9)
- Annexation (7)
- Attorney Work Product (1)
- Authority (12)
- Authority to Zone (2)
- Big Box/Formula Retail (8)
- Book Reviews (11)
- Building Codes (2)
- Climate Change (46)
- Collateral Estoppel (2)
- Comprehensive Plan (29)
- Condemnation/Eminent Domain (49)
- Conditions on Approval (9)
- Conservation Easements (2)
- Contract Zoning (2)
- Current Caselaw (723)
- Current Caselaw – New York (338)
- Declaratory Relief (3)
- Definitions (5)
- Development Agreements (4)
- Docks (1)
- Due Process (75)
- Easements (5)
- Enforcement (39)
- Environmental Justice (12)
- Environmental Review (19)
- Equal Protection (45)
- Equitbale Estoppel (2)
- Estoppel (1)
- Ethics (79)
- Exactions (10)
- Exemption from Zoning (2)
- Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (1)
- Fair Housing Act Amendments (17)
- Family (2)
- Federal Preemption (2)
- Fees (1)
- Financing (1)
- first amendment (2)
- Floating Zones (2)
- FOIL (2)
- Growth Management (1)
- Historic Preservation (25)
- Home Occupations (9)
- Homeland Security (1)
- Hours of Operation (1)
- Immunity (3)
- Impact Fees (4)
- Incentive Zoning (1)
- Injunctive Relief (4)
- Junkyards (4)
- Jurisdiction (2)
- Lot Merger (3)
- Mandamus (4)
- Mediation (1)
- Medical Marijuana (1)
- Mining (15)
- Mobile Homes (4)
- moratoria (10)
- New Legislation (45)
- New York (7)
- Non-Conforming Uses (60)
- Notice (4)
- Nuisance (11)
- Open Meetings (9)
- Performance Bond (2)
- Planned Development Districts (12)
- Players in the Land Use Game (1)
- Preemption (34)
- Prior Precedent (1)
- Procedural Issues (40)
- Property Rights (5)
- Records (2)
- Redevelopment (9)
- Referenda (19)
- Regional Planning (5)
- Religious Uses – Non-RLUIPA (13)
- Remedies (1)
- Res Judicata (1)
- Residency Restrictions (11)
- Restrictive Covenants (5)
- Retaliation (1)
- Retroactive Application (1)
- Rezoning (17)
- Ripeness (25)
- RLUIPA (75)
- Section 1983 Liability (12)
- Senior Housing (6)
- Signs (51)
- Site Plan Review (19)
- Smart Growth (9)
- solar energy (4)
- Special Use/Exception (49)
- Spot Zoning (10)
- Standards of Review (4)
- Standing (48)
- Statewide Planning (1)
- Statute of Limitations (23)
- Straddled Parcels (1)
- Subdivision Regulation (48)
- Takings (79)
- Transfer of Development Rights (4)
- Uncategorized (32)
- Uniformity (1)
- Urbanism (1)
- Utilities (1)
- Variances (96)
- Vested Rights (24)
- Voting (3)
- Wind Development (35)
- Wireless Communications (39)
- Zoning – Interpretation (37)
- Zoning Administration (10)
- Zoning Map (1)
- Zoning-Adopting/Amending (5)
Archives
Blogroll
- Agricultural Law
- Attorney.org-environmental and land use law
- Community Benefits Agreements
- Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold’s Blog
- Environmental Justice Blog
- Envirosphere
- Florida Land Use Law
- Georgia Zoning Blog
- Gideon’s Trumpet
- Green Building Law Blog
- Green Building Law Update
- Green Real Estate Law
- Hawaii Land Use Law
- IMLA Blog
- Inverse Condemnation
- Land Use Law Professor Blog
- Land Use, Environmental and Real Estate Law in California
- Midwest Planning BLUZ
- National Eminent Domain Blog
- New Jersey Condemnation Law
- New Jersey Land Use Law
- New York Legal Update
- New York Zoning and Municipal Law Blog
- NJ Eminent Domain Law
- NY Times City Room:Land Use Planning
- Property Professor Blog
- RLUIPA Blog
- Scenic America Blog
- SCOTUSblog
- Teaching Climate Change Law & Policy
- The Eminent Domain Law Blog
- Tucson Land Use Law
- Warming Law
- Wind Power Law
Disclaimer
This blog is provided for general informational purposes only. It should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel. Persons requiring legal advice should retain a properly licensed lawyer. No attorney-client relationship will be formed based on use of this site and any comments or posts to this blog will not be privileged or confidential.
BLOG STATS
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Ocean Mist by Ed Merritt.
