Why Should I Hire An Experienced Eminent Domain Attorney?

Anyone who receives notice that their property is threatened by eminent domain action should consult with an attorney who is very experienced in eminent domain law. Unfortunately, too many people obtain poor results after failing to hire an eminent domain attorney.

October 6th, 2022 | by Mike Faherty

Faherty Law Firm Assists I-83 Property Owners

I-83 project uproots Dauphin County residents, businesses: ‘Not knowing causes anxiety’ - pennlive.com

September 23rd, 2021 | by Mike Faherty

The Sunoco Pipeline and Mariner East Pipelines continue to be controversial

The Sunoco Pipeline and Mariner East Pipelines continue to be controversial. The Flynn v. Sunoco Pipeline case resulted in an Order from Pennsylvania Public Utility Judge Elizabeth Barnes.

February 5th, 2021 | by Tara Horvath

U.S Supreme Court Reviews Property Rights Re The PennEast Pipeline

On February 3, 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States granted review of the September 10, 2019 Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision which held that New Jersey is entitled to immunity from condemnation suits initiated by PennEast Pipeline Company for the purpose of building a 120-mile pipeline from Luzerne County, Pennsylvania to Mercer County, New Jersey.

March 23rd, 2020 | by Mike Faherty

Condemnation and COVID-19

I recommend reading the blog post below which is a short analysis of condemnation and covid-19 written by Attorneys Ehren Fournier and Katie Gray.

March 23rd, 2020 | by Mike Faherty

Coronavirus Restrictions As Condemnation?

Below is a summary of eminent domain law which may be helpful in these days of government restrictions as a result of the coronavirus.

July 18th, 2019 | by Mike Faherty

Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania

On June 21, 2019, the United States Supreme Court issued Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, _ S.Ct._ (2019), No. 17-647, 2019 WL 2552486. The landmark decision overruled Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172, 105 S.Ct. 3108, 87 L.Ed.2d 126.