Large private investment groups buying up single-family homes are the topic of a front-page New York Times article. The article focuses on Riverside County, Calif. The Times doesn't mention it, but Riverside County is adjacent to San Bernardino County, which was the center of efforts by other investors to use the government power of eminent domain to seize control of houses (or of the underlying mortgages or securitized mortgages). The Riverside County example, in which home prices are recovering amid substantial private investment on a market basis — without the use of the eminent domain power — would seem to undermine the case for the use of eminent domain. In fact, though again, the article doesn't get into it, I wouldn't be surprised if this development is concentrated in Riverside County more than in San Bernardino County because San Bernardino County has been most out-front in exploring the use of eminent domain power in a way that threatens the rights of some of the existing property owners.