Otay Mesa Property, L.P. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
Fifth Amendment Taking; U.S. Border Patrol’s Use of Seismic Intrusion Sensors on Plaintiffs’ Property; Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses; 42 U.S.C. § 4654.
OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND EXPENSES
WHEELER, Judge.
On June 5, 2015, Plaintiffs Otay Mesa Property, LP, Rancho Vista Del Mar, Otay International, LLC, OMC Property, LLC, D & D Landholdings, LP, and International Industrial Park, Inc. (collectively, “Otay Mesa”) filed a motion for recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (“URA”). 42…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- City of Riverside v. RiveraSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Dolores J. Copeland, Individually and on Behalf of the Class of All Others Similarly Situated v. F. Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Salazar v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2000
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Arnold v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
- Arnold v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
- Bradley v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2023
- HYATT v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2025
- HYATT v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2025
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.