The 4th Circuit Treats Property Owners the Same Way as All Other Constitutionally Aggrieved Plaintiffs

You just gotta read this! That is a post by the Pacific Legal Foundation describing the Fourth Circuit’s brand new decision in Sansotta v. Town of Nags Head.

In it David Breemer of the Pacific Legal Foundation gives us a concise analysis of the court’s holding in a taking case, which for once is perfectly logical. It holds that when a defendant-city removes a taking case from state court to federal court (as is its right under federal law — see Chicago v. International College of Surgeons)  that means that it chooses to litigate in federal court, and thereby waives its right to litigate in state court. Makes sense to us. You shouldn’t be able to manipulate the judicial process and blow hot and cold on the same issue. The notion that a defendant can remove a case from state to federal court against the plaintiff’s will, and then argue that the plaintiff should have litigated it in state court, is an outrageous bit of manipulation of the judicial process, so we are glad that at least the Fourth Circuit has recognized it and has a sufficient regard for the integrity of its own process, to say “no way!” to such intellectual jiggery-pokery.

To read the entire opinion (by Judge Shedd), if nothing else for the logic of its argument, go to Sansotta v. Town of Nags Head, 4th Cir., No. 12-1538, opinion filed July 25 1013.

It’s a good read. Go for it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *