On Feb. 18, the Law & Economics Center at George Mason University Scalia Law School is hosting the free online event “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Civil Justice — Can Common Law Adjust to a Drone World?”
The exposure of the weaknesses embedded in our system of public land use regulation during the crises of 2020 presents a unique and timely opportunity for serious consideration of major and minor adjustments to state statutes, local ordinances, and judicial decisions.
At its meeting on January 20 and 21, 2022, the ALI Council reviewed and discussed Council Drafts of nine projects.
The Colorado Sun has published an article discussing a new water bill in the state’s upcoming legislative session. The proposed bill seeks to prohibit speculation for pure financial gain.
Confirming expectations, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously denied Mississippi’s claim that Tennessee is stealing its groundwater.
At its meeting on October 21 and 22, 2021, the Council reviewed and discussed Council Drafts and approved drafts and portions of drafts.
In this Article, we take a more sober look at the tokenization phenomenon and, in doing so, describe what exactly it means when it comes to property rights. What can a purchaser of a token expect? How is a token actually connected to the underlying asset, if at all? What does the law—not the hype—have to say about it?
This essay examines connections between tort law and property, and the Restatements’ treatment of tort liability for loss of, damage to, or interference with property interests.
Adverse possession is one of property law’s most central doctrines. Yet, this Article contends, the need it answers has been largely misunderstood.
For many years, leading treatise writers have advised that if a prescriptive easement claimant establishes that otherwise unexplained use of another’s land has occurred in an open and notorious manner and continued without interruption for the statutory prescription period, the claimant’s use is presumed to have been adverse to the owner. The same leading authorities acknowledge that a minority of courts employ the opposite presumption—that otherwise unexplained use is presumed to be permissive.