Friday, March 12, 2010

Guggenheim v. City of Goleta (9th Cir. - March 12, 2010)

I feel bad repeatedly talking about en banc review during the last couple of days. I know I must sound like a broken record sometime.

That said, it's an important component of the process.

Here's a case that I said back in September would probably get taken en banc even though the panel opinion was joined by both Judge Bybee and Judge Goodwin. Even though it was a largely fact-bound opinion about whether a particular city's mobile home ordinance constituted a taking.

And today the Ninth Circuit did precisely that. If only to prove that even a broken clock -- like a law professor -- is typically correct at least twice a day.

(I say "typically" since a broken clock is potentially correct three times on the day that daylight savings time ends and potentially only once on the day daylight savings time begins.)