Jump to Navigation

News & Resources

Real Estate Articles

Eminent Domain

Eminent domain is the inherent power of a sovereign government to condemn and take private property without the owner's permission and often over his or her strenuous objection. The US Constitution mandates that federal and state governments may only take property for public use and with just compensation. The government also must provide due process of law to the property owner during a condemnation.

Read More

Can the Government Regulate How Much Rent I Can Charge for My Residential Housing Unit?

Some residential rental units, usually in multifamily buildings, are subject to rent-control laws that strictly regulate how much a landlord can charge, and the amount and frequency of rent increases. These laws also tend to impose restrictions and procedural safeguards on the eviction process, usually making it more difficult to evict tenants. Any property owner in a community with rent controls should seek the advice of a seasoned real estate lawyer to understand the impact of these laws on rental properties and leases. It is equally important to consult with a skilled real estate attorney if you are even considering purchasing residential rental property in a rent-controlled community to understand if and how the tightly regulated system will affect your investment.

Read More

Property Law & Real Estate Case Summaries

[03/09] Martinez v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.
In an action under Section 8(b) of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), and California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), claiming that a mortgage lender charged plaintiffs an illegal underwriting fee, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed where: 1) the clear and unambiguous language of RESPA Section 8(b) did not reach the practice of "overcharging"; and 2) the UCL claims alleging "unfair" and "fraudulent" conduct were preempted by the National Bank Act, and the allegations of "illegal" conduct failed to state a claim.

[03/09] Seltzer v. Barnes
Trial court's denial of defendant's anti-SLAPP motion, arising from an underlying suit involving claims against a property management company and homeowners' association, is reversed where: 1) the trial court erred in concluding plaintiff's two causes of action against defendant do not arise from speech or petitioning activity where his alleged conduct was the negotiation of a settlement in the prior case; and 2) because defendant may not be held liable for the alleged conduct under the litigation privilege, plaintiff has failed to show a probability of prevailing on her causes of action for fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

[03/09] Hoopa Valley Tribe v. US
In an action against the United States for breach of fiduciary duty brought by the Hoopa Valley Tribe, arising from the distribution of the remainder in a Settlement Fund established under the Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act only to the Yurok Tribe, summary judgment in favor of the government is vacated and remanded where: 1) the Hoopa Valley Tribe lacks standing because it cannot show an injury in fact; but 2) the matter should have been dismissed without prejudice

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.

FirmSite® by FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business.