Eminent Domain Case

[jay trotta]

i am actually doing a report for litigation. I am working on an appraisal of a mansion in New Vernon, New Jersey. The subject is a multimillion dollar home on a landlocked lot with an access easement through the neighboring parcel that has street frontage. Turns out that the easement is improperly defined and inadequate (less than 5 feet at its narrowest point; car can't even pass, forget about a truck or fire truck!). Have you ever had any experience with such an easement, where a car cannot access the property? This property has been in litigation for years. The two sides have not come to an agreement. Essentially, the home is now landlocked, even though it's an improved site!!

Many, many years ago a sub-division which obtained a huge Mortgage (in excess of $2+ million) for development; the parcel actually had "no access" to any of the several surrounding roads. I would recommend a review of State Statutes to Land Locked parcels and Health & Safety accessibility.

Don't know your area and just a thought, good luck

 

[djd09]

The good news is the turnpike appraiser wasn't sleeping with the chief counsel of the homeowner. Pucker up.

 

[djd09]

Last week I introduced LB 752 at its hearing. This bill repeals a section of the law I believe is immoral.

Nebraska Statute 70-1014.02 (5) says: “Only a consumer-owned electric supplier operating in the State of Nebraska may exercise eminent domain authority to acquire the land rights necessary for the construction of transmission lines and related facilities. The exercise of eminent domain to provide needed transmission lines and related facilities for a privately developed renewable energy generation facility is a public use.”

Read that last sentence and let that soak in. How can something that is defined in the law as a “private” thing be called a “public” thing in the same sentence?

Wind energy projects are private business ventures. They are not being built by or for any agency of government. They are not for the public use. They are not serving a “public necessity.” We have a surplus of electrical generation in Nebraska. They are not built because we need the electricity. They are built for a handful of investors and landowners to make money. Period. Although I suppose they are pretty good for generating campaign donations.

http://www.nptelegraph.com/opinion/...cle_444c2662-13a8-11e8-815e-ef3a0cad5e22.html

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Juries are always a major wildcard in eminent domain proceedings. The plaintiff's attorney paints the condemning body as a mean and ugly force and paints the property as the poor little guy being bullied by the condemning body. Sometimes this approach blurs the reality of the damages. Been there in some court proceedings.

Clearly the appraisers had a significant difference of opinion on whether there were "severance damages" to the remainder.

 

[djd09]

Juries are a wildcard in any case. Justice was served, and the government lost. The gov appraiser looks like they were advocating for a client. That is a no no.

 

[Mark K]

Justice was served, and the government lost.

Unless the state appeals.

I was involved with one case that went to the state Supreme Court and sent back for retrial due to the judge's improper instructions to the appraisers and the jury. It took 9 years start to finish but the state had to appeal otherwise a bad precedent would have been established for future condemnation cases. The owner eventually was awarded much less than the original jury awarded.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

"justice was served" said OJ Simpson! Clearly a difference of opinion between the two appraisers. So the plaintiff's appraiser couldn't have been an advocate? Simple take!

 

[djd09]

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

It is that inane view that the government is always the bad guy that undoubtedly influenced the jury.

 

[djd09]

No Property Is Safe. Thanks to Kelo, if the government believes that another private party can make better economic use of a property, it can be seized. This problem is exacerbated because courts defer to government about whether something is a public use and whether a plan even makes sense. Justice O’Connor truly captured the extent of the problems with Kelo in her dissent, including this important point: “The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.”[11]

Those who will be harmed the most will be low-income individuals. There will be a “reverse Robin Hood effect.” The government is not likely to go after valuable properties to help promote economic development and generate more tax revenue. Instead, it will seek out properties that are not generating the desired economic benefits (and cost less) and transfer those properties to private parties whom government officials think will provide the desired effects. Further, those with fewer resources are less able to challenge the seizures of property, making it easier for government to seize the property.

https://www.heritage.org/courts/rep...ime-congress-protect-american-property-owners

All land is theirs for the purpose of increase tax revenue.