Eminent Domain Report

Yesterday, the City of Richmond caught a small reprieve with respect to its plan to condemn underwater mortgages.  As reported by Reuters, the federal district court ruled that the lawsuit filed by lenders Wells Fargo, Deutsche Bank and The Bank of New York Mellon is unripe. The judge denied the lenders' request for an injunction to halt the City's plan to condemn underwater mortgages even though the lenders argued that the City's use of eminent domain in this context is unconstitutional.  Next Monday, the judge will decide whether to dismiss the action or leave it pending.

Despite three major banks filing federal lawsuits against the City of Richmond last month related to its plan to condemn underwater mortgages, the City continues to press on.  On Tuesday, the City voted 4-3 to continue its partnership with Mortgage Resolution Partners (MRP), the mastermind behind the scheme. (See articles from The Press Enterprise and Contra Costa Times.)   The council and MRP will form a Joint Powers Authority to administer the plan and will attempt to attract more cities to join the effort. 

While the City is still moving forward, there continues to be ...

The Southern California Chapter of the Appraisal Institute holds a great conference each year covering a variety of hot-topic issues.  The 2013 Conference will be held this Thursday, September 12, 2013, and my partner Rick Rayl and I will be presenting on the future of redevelopment in California.  So, if you're interested in what's played out over the last year for redevelopment agencies, what lawsuits have been filed, what projects are moving forward, and what the future holds for all the property that is now owned by the successor agencies, come join us.  

The rest of the Conference is ...

In July, the City of Hayward passed several resolutions of necessity to acquire property for its Interstate 880 / State Route 92 Reliever Route Project.  The Project will extend Whitesell Street to provide access to State Route 92 from Winton Avenue, which is more of an industrial area.  While it sounds straight-forward, there appears to be some complex acquisitions.  Last week, the San Jose Mercury News provided some insight to the complicated project.

The city prides itself on never having filed an eminent domain action for its public project and here, the city is only seeking to ...

Eminent domain cases typically revolve around a "date of value" – the date on which property is valued in determining the amount of just compensation the condemning agency must pay.  That date is set by statute; typically, it is the date on which the agency deposits the amount of "probable compensation" to be awarded.  But sometimes, the agency's activities, such as project planning and acquisition efforts, negatively affect the value of the property.  In such circumstances, property owners may attempt to hold the agency responsible for such declines in value by claiming (1 ...

Downzoning property is always a thorny issue:  on the one hand, zoning changes are typical, "police power"-type governmental activities; on the other hand, they can significantly impact property values, and in some cases can result in governmental takings liability.  When a property owner experiences a change in zoning, there are typically two theories that can be pursued:  one is so-called "spot zoning," and the other is a regulatory taking.  

Under the first theory, "spot zoning," a property owner can have a zoning designation invalidated if it can prove the government targeted the ...

I'll give you a hint, this is a bit of a trick question.  Give up?  Okay.  Whenever you name a State agency, of course. 

In Lavine v. State of California (pdf), a property owner filed a lawsuit after the Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted, and the California State Water Resources Control Board approved, a ban on on-site septic systems in Malibu.  (Case No. B238030, Aug. 20, 2013, Unpublished.)  The plaintiff owned a single-family residence in Malibu that utilized an on-site septic system; no public sewer system was available to residences in the area.  Although the ...

Eminent domain attorneys struggle with a concept foreign to most civil litigators:  figuring out the roles of the judge and jury.  Even most non-attorneys know the basic rule of trial:  the jury is the "fact-finder."  But in eminent domain cases, things are a bit different. 

The jury still acts as fact-finder, but only in one arena:  the quest to determine the amount of just compensation to which the owner is entitled.  This narrow scope means that the judge ends up ruling on all issues of law, plus mixed issues of fact and law, plus pure issues of fact to the extent those issues don't go to the issue of ...

It appears the raisin handlers' luck in the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision Horne v. US Department of Agriculture has spawned a new federal takings challenge by another group of fruit growers.  This time it's a group of tomato growers asserting a takings challenge against the federal government, with a bit of a twist.  (And yes, I had to check, but both raisins and tomatoes are technically fruits -- see the things you learn?)

According to an article in the Packer, Tomato growers say eminent domain applies to 2008 crop, tomato growers are suing the federal government for $40 million in ...

Money is once again being allocated to improve public infrastructure in California.  The California Transportation Commission announced this week the award of $487 million to various projects throughout the state.  Included are:

• San Bernardino Associated Governments' (SANBAG) Lenwood Road Railroad Grade Separation Project in the City of Barstow.
• Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) Lakeview Avenue Grade Separation Project in the City of Placentia.
• The Richmond Rail Connector for a new route between San Pablo and Richmond.
• Several Caltrans State Highway ...

Over the past several months, the United States Supreme Court and the California Courts of Appeal have issued several significant regulatory takings opinions addressing the liability of government agencies for enacting regulations or otherwise conditioning proposed developments.  To really dig into these opinions and their importance, Law Seminars International will be putting on a one-hour telebriefing, Regulatory Takings Claims In California, on August 19 at 1 p.m. (PST).  I will be moderating the discussion with two other outstanding regulatory takings attorneys:  Robert ...

We all knew this was coming (see my post from July 23).  If you poke a sleeping giant, it's going to file a lawsuit against you in federal court.  Yesterday, in response to the City of Richmond's preliminary actions to condemn underwater mortgages, three heavy-hitting banks fired back by filing lawsuits in California federal court to block the condemnations. 

According to multiple news sources (here, here and here), Wells Fargo Bank, Deutsche Bank and Bank of New York Mellon Corp. have asked the court to find the City's plan unconstitutional and block its implementation.  The banks argue ...

The Press Democrat is reporting that Sonoma County has agreed to pay $815,000 to acquire by eminent domain a family's 6.5-acre property next to the Charles M. Schulz airport for a runway extension project, settling the contentious case on the eve of trial.  According to the article, Landowners, Sonoma County settle airport expansion lawsuit, the County valued the property at $135,000, while the owner's appraiser reached a valuation conclusion of $1.5 million.  Why the large spread in appraisals?  Apparently because of a dispute over the property's highest and best use.

To provide ...

As an eminent domain lawyer, I sometimes feel about takings claims like Justice Potter Stewart felt about obscenity:  I know it when I see it.  But every so often, a case comes along that reminds us that we might need to dig just a little bit deeper. 

In TrinCo Investment Co. v. United States, No. 2012-5130 (July 18, 2013), it all starts out seeming so simple.  The government comes onto private property without permission, takes $6.6 million worth of timber without asking, and then wanders off without offering so much as a dime in just compensation.  Hard to miss this one:  it's an obvious taking. 

It's not too often a property owner succeeds with an inverse condemnation/regulatory takings claim based on a general plan amendment or zone change.  The owner must generally demonstrate that the regulation either on its face, or when specifically applied to the owner's property, deprives the owner of the economically beneficial uses of the property.  The first attack (a "facial challenge") is difficult to prove, as it is uncommon that a general plan amendment/zone change is drafted in such a way that it -- on its face -- prevents all economic uses of the property.  The second attack (an ...

The City of Agoura Hills is moving forward with its plans for the U.S. 101/Palo Comado Canyon Road Interchange at Chesebro Road.  According to the City,

The City has received approval from the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on the Project Study Report (PSR), which is the document that identifies the deficiencies of the interchange and future issues while identifying the most likely construction improvements that will resolve existing and future traffic issues.

Though the project is still in the design phase, it has ...

The City of Santee's Prospect Avenue Widening Project is moving forward, and because the City has not been able to secure all the necessary right of way voluntarily, the City is now poised to condemn the remaining interests it needs for the project. 

On July 10, the City adopted a resolution of necessity which allows the City to proceed with the eminent domain actions on as many as 43 property interests, including several full take acquisitions, along with many partial takes and temporary construction easements.  

A July 23 article in the Santee Patch, Santee Council OKs Property Seizures ...

It's been a while since we focused on the whole condemnation of underwater mortgages scheme but that doesn't mean the idea has died off.  To the contrary, apparently at least four California cities have now signed advisory agreements with Mortgage Resolution Partners.  According to the Las Vegas Sun and various other news outlets (see here and here), the cities of Richmond, San Joaquin, Orange Cove, El Monte, and perhaps a few others, have entered into an agreement with Mortgage Resolution Partners and are looking to pursue the condemnation of underwater mortgages. 

The first ...

We haven't provided much in the way of updates recently on California infrastructure projects requiring eminent domain.  Either we've been too busy to notice or it's been surprisingly quiet recently.  But, some headlines did just catch our attention, so we thought we'd provide an update to our readers.

• San Luis Obispo to Institute Eminent Domain:  according to a recent article in the Tribune, City Council approves temporary easement on private land for work in congested area, the San Luis Obispo City Council unanimously adopted a resolution of necessity, approving the use of ...

Following up on my post on the case, I had the opportunity to speak with Colin O'Keefe of LXBN regarding the Supreme Court's ruling in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District. In the interview, I explain the court's ruling and what impact it could have nationally. 

In our niche practice of eminent domain, inverse condemnation, and regulatory takings, the blogosphere world is going bonkers.  Why?  Because the United State Supreme Court just issued its decision in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt District, No. 11-1447 (cert. granted Oct. 5, 2012), holding that the "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" standards that apply to the government's attempt to exact land in exchange for a land use permit similarly apply to the government's attempt to demand monetary exactions.  This isn't necessarily shocking news for those of us ...

In 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court issued Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172, a landmark decision (as Supreme Court decisions often are) that drastically slashed the number of federal takings claims.  In Williamson County, the Supreme Court held that courts lack jurisdiction over federal regulatory takings claims unless a final decision has been issued and the property owner has exhausted all "adequate State procedures."  The Supreme Court also clarified that exhaustion of adequate State procedures generally requires ...

This week, the Supreme Court issued the second of its three takings decision for this term.  In Horne v. Department of Agriculture, No. 12-123 (June 10, 2013), the Court reversed an earlier decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, holding that California raisin handlers could assert a takings claim as a defense to an enforcement action over alleged non-compliance with a raisin regulatory scheme.  

At first glance, the case appears to be of little consquence.  The factual background is quite unique, and the holding is pretty narrowly drawn to those specific ...

We have two big IRWA events coming up. 

IRWA Annual Education Conference

The biggest conference of the year, the IRWA Education Conference, starts June 23 in Charleston, West Virginia.  As always, there will be many great education sessions with strong panels of speakers.  There are also some fun social events and -- on Sunday and Monday -- an exhibition hall. 

Nossaman will be holding down the fort in Booth 305A, trying to keep the troublemakers next to us in line.  Yes, OPC, I'm talking about you. 

I will be there with my colleagues Ben Rubin, the incoming President for Chapter 67 in Orange ...

The House of Representatives has once again resurrected the "Private Property Rights Protection Act" (HR 1944), a bill that would limit the power of eminent domain on a nationwide scale.  I say once again, because as we reported in 2012 (see January 26, 2012 post by Brad Kuhn), the House Judiciary Committee approved a nearly identical bill by an overwhelming 23-5 vote, only to have the bill languish on the House floor.  The vote this time around, however, was nowhere near as emphatic, as the bill barely passed out of the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice with a skimpy 5-3 ...

According to an article in the Mercury News, Fremont may use eminent domain process to buy land needed for proposed downtown, the City of Fremont's City Council will be holding a public hearing on Tuesday to consider the adoption of a resolution of necessity to acquire a property for the Capitol Avenue Extension Project.  The impacted property is located at 39138 Fremont Blvd., and it consists of 65,150 square feet of land improved with a three-story building.

The Mercury News article indicates that the staff report supporting the adoption of the resolution of necessity provides ...

After two years of negotiating with residential property owners, the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors approved acquisition of the property by eminent domain.  The Modesto Bee reports that the board approved the acquisition of a single-family residence at its meeting on Tuesday in order to construct its Claribel Road project, which will cost the county $15.2 million.  The project will widen Claribel Road from two lanes to a four-lane separated highway relieving congestion and reducing the safety concerns of the current configuration, which causes an estimated 16 accidents ...

Given the maze of procedural and substantive hurdles involved, property owners rarely succeed with regulatory takings claims.  Even when owners do win, it is yet more uncommon for courts to award damages, instead allowing the public agency to repeal the regulation.  But securing a victory on liability and a damages award for a temporary regulatory taking, well, that is nearly uncharted territory (going into the realm of unicorns, the Loch Ness Monster, and other mythical creatures); we've heard stories of such events, but it is rare to find reliable documentation.

That all changed ...

The California Transportation Commission (CTC) recently announced the award of $878 million to fund 114 transportation projects.  Brian Kelly, the acting Secretary of Business, Transportation & Housing Agency, stated:

This billion-dollar investment helps preserve California’s great infrastructure of the past and put thousands of Californian’s to work building something new.  These investments in preservation and innovation are absolutely critical to California’s economy:  In 2010, traffic congestion caused 95 million hours of delay, wasting fuel and ...

The City of Imperial has taken the first step in pursuing an eminent domain proceeding by adopting a resolution of necessity to acquire a vacant property for its Transit Center Project.  As reported by the Imperial Valley Press, the City and the property owner have been negotiating the City's purchase of the property but have reached an impasse.  

While the owner concedes the project is needed in the city, he believes his property is "very valuable" and that other locations would be better suited for the Project.  The City disagreed and is moving forward with acquiring the ...

An eminent decision out of the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals is not a common occurrence.  A Ninth Circuit eminent domain decision dealing with intangible property is even less common.  Yet, on April 26, 2013, the Ninth Circuit took it even one step further, issuing an eminent domain decision dealing with intangible property in which the condemning authority is an Indian Tribe.

Having explained just how rare it is to see this type of decision, I now need to make a confession.  While the Ninth Circuit decision arises out of an eminent domain action in which an Indian Tribe is ...

As reported earlier today by a number of news outlets (see for example this KCET article by Chris Clarke), the Bureau of Land Management ("BLM") will be issuing a Final Rule to facilitate right-of-way applications for lands with wind and solar energy development potential.  As explained in the press release issued by the BLM, in the past

"lands included in a proposed right-of-way [would] remain open to the location and entry of mining claims while the BLM" considered the application.

However, the Final Rule, which will be published in the Federal Register, permits the BLM to temporarily ...

We've talked in the past about just how hard it is to state a regulatory takings claim under the Supreme Court's decision in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104.  I'd go through the test and how hard it is again, but it's complicated, a lot of work and, quite frankly, I'm a bit tired today.  So here's my lazy approach.  Read one of our earlier posts on the subject: 

• Sometimes Regulatory Takings Do Exist Under Penn Central;
• Takings Claims and the Morass that Surrounds Them; or
• Major Regulatory Takings Case Reversed by Ninth Circuit. 

The bottom line is that the courts have ...

Light rail and rapid transit appear to be the hot ticket in California.  Most of our right-of-way acquisition and eminent domain work over the last few years has centered on such projects.  One interesting dispute that regularly pops up between the land owner's appraiser and the public agency's appraiser is whether or not there are "project benefits".  In analyzing the property's "before-condition" value, such benefits need to be excluded (whether positive or negative).  (See Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1263.330.)  But when assessing the property's "after-condition" value in the case ...

California's loss of business goodwill statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 1263.510, provides that before a business can submit its goodwill claim to a jury in an eminent domain case, the business must first demonstrate that:

• The loss is caused by the taking;

• The loss cannot be prevented by relocation or other reasonable mitigation efforts; and

• The loss will not be covered through another form of compensation, such as relocation benefits.

In late-2012, the California Court of Appeal issued a decision in People ex rel. Dept. of Transportation (Caltrans) v. Dry Canyon ...

Acquiring property for public projects typically does not occur until after the project has received environmental approval. While this is the generally accepted rule – and it makes sense for a number of reasons – must a project receive environmental clearance before an agency may begin the property acquisition process? In a recent published decision, Golden Gate Land Holdings, LLC v. East Bay Regional Park District, the California Court of Appeal answered no, and permitted an agency to proceed in reverse order: filing an eminent domain action prior to its complying with the ...

Next Tuesday, April 16, Rick Rayl and I will be hosting a teleconference for the National Business Institute titled "Acquiring Right-of-Way".  It's a 90 minute conference geared towards a national audience of attorneys, real estate professionals, government agencies, appraisers, energy companies, and right-of-way consultants.  You can find a link to the conference here.  For those of you who may be interested, here's the agenda:

1. Acquiring Right of Way for Public & Private Projects (environmental review process & funding constraints, acquisition process & timing, and ...

According to an article in the Daily Republic, Jury: County owes $1.24M in eminent domain dispute, Solano County and a local land owner recently completed an eminent domain trial, and the jury sided with the owner.  The case, Solano County v. Valine, involved the County's partial acquisition of about 10 acres through the middle of the owner's 82-acre farmland in order to develop the Suisun Valley Parkway.  

Our esteemed colleague, professor Gideon Kanner, reports that the government agency initially offered $575,000 for the partial acquisition.  After no agreement could be reached ...

Following the 2005 Kelo decision, California enacted a number of modest eminent domain reforms.  For eminent domain attorneys, the most significant changes arguably came in the procedures for obtaining prejudgment possession.  This can be a major issue on large public improvement projects, as construction schedules and funding commitments are often tied to the date on which the condemning agency secures possession of the property needed for the project.

The new laws both (1) shift the balance of power somewhat away from the agency and towards the property owner, and (2) extend the ...

According to an article in the Whittier Daily News, La Mirada agrees to pay $1.8 million to settle eminent domain case for new railroad underpass, the City of La Mirada has agreed to pay $1.8 million to settle the last eminent domain case involving acquisition of easements and property for the Valley View Avenue underpass at the BNSF Railroad crossing.  The parties were likely close to trial as they had recently exchanged final offers and final demands (see Code of Civil Procedure section 1250.410).  

The $1.8 million settlement sounds like a good deal for the City, as the owner's final ...

For those of you who have followed Nossaman's blog since the very early days, you'll recall our coverage of a significant regulatory takings case, Monks v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes.  The 2008 California decision received much press coverage in that it was one of the very few instances where property owners overcame the myriad substantive and procedural obstacles and succeeded under a regulatory takings theory.  While the Court found a taking occurred, the case was remanded back to the trial court to determine the appropriate remedy.  Now, nearly five years later, the dispute has now ...

What happens when a property owner unknowingly pays the electricity bill on a city-owned parking lot for over 15 years?  If you said nothing, then you get a gold star.

In Murphy v. City of Sierra Madre (pdf), a recent decision out of the Second Appellate District, the plaintiffs-appellants were the subsequent owners of a piece of property originally purchased from the City through a Disposition Development Agreement.  When the City originally transferred the property, it also mistakenly transferred an adjacent electrical meter for a City-owned parking lot.  As a result, from ...

Over the past several months, we've been following some of the recent takings cases that have made their way up to the United States Supreme Court.  So where do things currently stand?  As you've likely heard, the Court issued its decision in Arkansas Game & Fish Commission v. United States (see our summary here); we're waiting for a decision after oral argument in Koontz v. St. John's River Management District (see our summary here); and just this week, the Court heard oral argument in Horne v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.  

If you're looking for an excellent summary of the Horne oral argument ...

For those of you who attended the joint meeting today between Chapter 1 of the International Right of Way Association and the Appraisal Institute, we promised to post a cheat sheet that reminds you about the cases associated with our cleverly crafted slides.  (For those of you who did not attend, you missed a great event, and will be punished by likely having no idea what we're talking about below.)

As promised, here is the recap of our case slides, each of which started with:

Where We Learned . . .

1. "That the Court can’t exclude appraisers simply because the judge thinks they are full of crap":  ...

Rick Rayl and I will be speaking this Tuesday, March 19, at the International Right of Way Association (IRWA) Chapter 1 (Los Angeles) annual co-luncheon with the Appraisal Institute.  We'll provide an eminent domain "Year in Review," covering all the important court decisions from the past year.  To make it a bit interesting, we'll be coming up with some funny phrases, and we're hoping some of you will be able to guess what case we're talking about.  Rick promises there will be prizes....

The annual lunch between the IRWA and the Appraisal Institute is always a good one, so we hope you'll ...

On February 27, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed (pdf) the dismissal of a Fifth Amendment takings claim based on the finding that the claim was "not ripe."  The claim is unusual because it arose in the context of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Casitas Municipal Water District (Casitas) has a contract with the federal Bureau of Reclamation and a license with the State of California authorizing it to divert water for the Ventura River Project (Project).  The contract with the Bureau of Reclamation states that Casitas ...

According to an article in the Press Democrat, Rohnert Park OKs eminent domain at site of future hotel, restaurant, the Rohnert Park City Council recently adopted a resolution of necessity authorizing the use of eminent domain to acquire part of a property needed for a street widening project.  The street widening project is necessary accommodate increased traffic from the new Graton Resort & Casino, and it will require the partial acquisition of 22 properties.

The acquisition encompasses over 16,000 square feet from an undeveloped property that is slated to be improved ...

Before you get your hopes up, this is not a reference to "Opposites Attract" by Paula Abdul, and I will not be singing.  Rather, I am referring to the Montana Legislature's recent decision to repeal a two-year-old law that gave private power-line developers the authority to condemn private property.  The 2011 law was passed in order to override a state court decision prohibiting the use of eminent domain for private power-line development.  As reported in the Independent Record, supporters of the repeal effort believe "that the law gave unprecedented power to private companies to run ...

Earlier this week, in an unpublished decision (pdf), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of compensation for construction that altered a point of access to an existing business.  (Wardany v. City of San Jacinto (9th Cir. 2013) 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3463.) 

For those readers who never forget a post, you probably recall that we discussed the district court's decision a couple of years ago.  (See Brad Kuhn's June 1, 2011 Blog Post.)  For the rest of us mortals, here is a quick summary.   The property owner operated a "One Stop Market" that vehicle traffic could access ...

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the owner of Silveira Ranch are involved in an interesting valuation dispute stemming from Caltrans' acquisition of part of the ranchland needed for Highway 101 improvements.  According to an article in the Marin Independent Journal, Judge gives state a nod in Silveira ranch eminent domain case, the parties disagree on the property's highest and best use, and as a result, they are widely off on their valuation opinions.  Caltrans has offered the owner $1.8 million for the acquisition, while the owner is demanding $6 ...