US Tax Court, T.C. Memo. 2015-130, July 14, 2015: Conservation easement deduction denied; inadequate baseline documentation; Belk violation.
Citing the precedent of the Belk II tax court memo, as affirmed by the Fourth Circuit decision in Belk III, the court denied any tax deduction for twin conservation easements that allowed for the alteration of boundaries between unrestricted [...]
Texas Court of Appeals, 4th Dist., No. 04-13-00221-CV, March 19, 2014: No abuse of discretion if board relies on non-expert opinion of neighbors in demolition decision.
Reilly sought a permit from the City historic preservation officer to demolish a house in a historic district in San Antonio. When the permit was denied, Reilly appealed to the Board [...]
US Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit, No. 11-50333, May 31, 2012: Time gap between historic building demolition order and demolition raises question of fact requiring trial, not summary judgment, on 4th amendment claim of unreasonable seizures and 14th Amendment procedural due process claim.
In 2008 the City of San Antonio demolished a building of some historic value. [...]
USDA announced May 14, 2010, that $175 million in funding is available for the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Wetlands Reserve Program. USDA says that funding will add 75,000 additional acres to the approximately 2.2 million acres currently enrolled in the program. The funding will go to wetland conservation projects in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, [...]
J. Kelly Gray; Rooster Springs, LP; and Rooster Springs Stable, LP, Appellants, v. The Key Ranch At The Polo Club Home Owners Association, Inc., Appellee.
Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District, Austin.
Filed: January 12, 2010.
The Key Ranch subdivision is a gated residential community. The appeals court upheld the trial court decision finding for the appellee [...]
No. 01-08-00179-CV, Court Of Appeals Of Texas, First District, Houston, opinion issued February 4, 2010
In this case applying Texas’ Open Beaches Act (Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann. §§ 61.001-.254) (“the Act”) the owners of several beachfront houses argued they should not be denied permits to repair their houses or forced to remove their houses after storms moved the beach vegetation line to the landward side of their structures. The issues included whether by common law a public easement existed on the beach, was it a rolling easement, did the Act required removal of the houses, and were the owners entitled to compensation for a taking. The Houston Court of Appeals concluded: Continue reading Brannan et al. v. State Of Texas et al.