MHC Financing Limited Partnership, et al. v. City of San Rafael, et al.

Case Updates

The U.S. Chamber and other business groups urged the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that rejected a property owner's Takings Clause claim where a local rent control regulation concededly denied the owner of over 80% of the value of its property. The Chamber's amicus brief argued that the Ninth Circuit erroneously concluded that property owners may not bring Takings Clause claims when the property had already been subject to regulation at the time of purchase.

Further, the Chamber explained that the Ninth Circuit and California have erected significant procedural hurdles that have made it exceedingly difficult - and rare - for Takings Clause claims to be adjudicated on the merits in the Ninth Circuit. If left to stand, the Ninth Circuit’s decision below will likely mean that, even if a case manages to make it past the procedural hurdles to the merits stage, there will never be another fully-litigated regulatory taking case from that circuit because they will be dismissed prior to trial.

Joining the Chamber on the brief are the National Federation of Independent Business and the Manufactured Housing Institute.

Jeremy B. Rosen, Steven S. Fleischman, and Lisa M. Freeman of Horvitz & Levy LLP represented the U.S. Chamber as co-counsel to the National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc.