Close

Gravel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law Blog

Updated:

The “Panama Papers” – What Next?

In The “Panama Papers” and the Secret World of Shell Corporations, my colleagues Carolina Fornos, Mark Hellerer, Maria Galeno, Joseph Jean, Alexander Hardiman, William Sullivan, Nancy Fischer, Nora Burke and Danielle Vrabie, discuss a leak of 11.5 million documents from a law firm in Panama that may implicate politicians, criminals, and…

Updated:

Texas Supreme Court: Protections of Governmental Immunity Remain Robust But Are Not Absolute

On April 1, 2016, the Texas Supreme Court, in Houston Belt & Terminal Railroad Co., et al.. v. City of Houston, et al., reviewed the implementation of the City of Houston’s 2011 drainage fee ordinance. The petitioner railroad companies were assessed substantial new annual city drainage fees of $3 million by…

Updated:

2015 San Francisco Gross Receipt Tax FAQs

In San Francisco Gross Receipts Tax – Frequently Asked Questions from the Real Estate Industry, Pillsbury attorney Rachel Horsch discusses frequently asked questions posed by commercial real estate investors and operators regarding how the San Francisco Gross Receipts Tax (GRT) may apply to typical commercial real estate investments and transactions.…

Updated:

Texas Supreme Court: Improper Application of Project-Influence Rule Resulted in Harmful Error

The Texas Constitution provides that “[n]o person’s property shall be taken, damaged or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation being made.” Tex. Const.  art. I, § 17. The Texas Supreme Court has effectuated this constitutional imperative by requiring payment of the “market value” of condemned property, which it has determined…

Updated:

Time—the Resulting Deductible of a Default?

In his November op-ed, C. Andrew Gibson states that bonds do not have a deductible as compared to a subcontractor default insurance (SDI) policy that does carry a deductible. The statement is literally correct. A bond does not have a “written” deductible when a default takes place. However, frustration develops when…

Updated:

New Law, New Opportunity: A closer look at Peru’s revised P3 framework

Historically, investors have pretty clearly found the Peruvian legal framework for procuring, awarding and monitoring concessions to be a favorable one — just since 1996, the country has awarded more than US$20bn in Public-Private Partnership concessions. But a new legislative structure for PPP financings in Peru entered into force at…

Updated:

4th Circuit Revisits N.C.’s Statute of Repose; No Bar to Hazardous Waste-Related Personal Injury Claims

Twice, courts have been called upon to interpret North Carolina’s 10-year statute of repose in connection with injuries allegedly stemming from the release of hazardous substances. CTS Corporation v. Waldburger involved CTS’s liability under CERCLA as the past owner of a manufacturing facility in North Carolina whose operations resulted in the release…

Updated:

8th Circuit Finds It Has Jurisdiction to Review EPA’s Approval of Minnesota Regional Haze Program

In mid-March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in National Parks Conservation Assoc.,  et al., v. McCarthy, approved the “Minnesota’s Regional Haze State Implementation Plan” (MRHSIP), rejecting the arguments opposing EPA’s approval filed by several environmental organizations. The conservation organizations challenged EPA’s approval of Minnesota’s decision to use the Transport…

Updated:

SCOTUS Rejects Interpretation of Law that Posed Serious Criminal Consequences

Earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court, in Sturgeon v. Frost, Alaska Regional Director of the National Park Service, issued a unanimous ruling reversing  the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s interpretation of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservations Act (ANILCA) that had the effect of subjecting the use of hovercrafts…

Updated:

10th Cir.: Time-Barred Claims Not Revived by Repeated and Continuing Violations Theories

In early March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, in Sierra Club v. Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company, in a 2-to-1 decision, affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Sierra Club’s Clean Air Act (CAA) citizens suit against OG&E, concluding that their civil penalty and equitable relief claims are time-barred because Sierra Club’s…