This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Constitutional Law

Apr. 18, 2024

Don’t make a federal case of it

In DeVillier v. Texas, the state removed a takings claim from state court to federal court and then argued that there was no federal jurisdiction over the state. In response, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Texas law provided a sufficient procedural vehicle to raise the federal takings claim in federal court.

Michael M. Berger

Senior Counsel, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP

2049 Century Park East
Los Angeles , CA 90067

Phone: (310) 312-4185

Fax: (310) 996-6968

Email: mmberger@manatt.com

USC Law School

Michael M. Berger is senior counsel at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP, where he is co-chair of the Appellate Practice Group. He has argued four takings cases in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Shutterstock

Admit it; it was one of the first things you heard in law school — you know, the old saw about not making a federal case of something. Presumably, federal cases are simply more complex than more run-of-the-mill state cases. One case, hot off the U.S Supreme Court press, that helps to illustrate this point is DeVillier v. Texas, no. 22-913 (Apr. 16, 2024). DeVillier began with a little game-playing by the State of...

To continue reading, please subscribe.

Already a subscriber?

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)