Eminent Domain Report

When one hears “eminent domain” or “condemnation,” you might envision a governmental agency or utility coming in and acquiring the entirety of a piece of property and leaving nothing behind.  However, often times, condemnation does not require the entire property, but only a portion or rights to use a portion a specific way. So, what is the difference between the various terms of fee simple, an easement, full take, and part take? … 

This past week I had the opportunity to attend the International Right of Way Association’s (IRWA) Region 1 Fall Forum and Symposium in San Diego, California. On Friday, Brad Kuhn and I presented an update on recent federal and state cases impacting takings, land use and development in California.  On Saturday, I was an attendee at the Fall Forum where IRWA professionals throughout Region 1 (California, Nevada, and Arizona) shared updates on the status of the industry in their area. … 

A question that arises with some frequency in our practice is whether a public entity can adversely possess a property interest against another public entity. The general rule of thumb is that a private entity cannot obtain an interest in real property owned by a public entity through adverse possession. This rule is in part based off of the long-established principle nullum tempus occurrit regi, which means "time does not run against the king."

In California, this common law principle has been affirmed and reaffirmed for over a century in our courts and has been codified by the ...

In the most recent biannual report from the Real Estate Law Committee of the International Right of Way Association, we collaborated with Robert Thomas and Ajay Gajaria to examine numerous cases at local, state and federal levels from January to the end of May 2022 that are of interest for professionals in the right-of-way industry.

In the report we also take a brief look at pending, failed and adopted legislation, while also providing updates on federal funds that have been or have yet to be allocated through the recent Infrastructure Bill. The report also provides a breakdown of ...

Typically, when a public agency acquires property by eminent domain, it names all potentially interested parties in the condemnation action. This includes the property owner, any easement holders, lien holders and usually businesses as well. If the agency does not name all interested parties, anyone with an interest may still appear in the action. Or if the party does not appear, it could potentially file a subsequent inverse condemnation action for the taking of its property interest (which could expose the agency to attorneys’ fees -- hence the importance of naming all ...

On April 1, Nossaman’s Eminent Domain Group hosted a webinar to discuss the impacts COVID-19 is having on the Right of Way industry.  First, I’d like to thank the people who attended, many of whom added thoughtful questions to the discussion.  It’s clear a lot of people are giving these issues a lot of thought.  Second, obviously things continue to evolve at a breathtaking pace, and even by the time this post goes from being drafted to appearing on the blog, things are likely to change. 

Note that this post is not meant to recap the things we discussed at the webinar.  If you weren’t able to join us and want to review what we covered, feel free to download the COVID-19 PowerPoint we used, or watch the entire recorded webinar.  No, the purpose of this post is to provide some insights as to what other right of way professionals are thinking about a few of these issues.  During the webinar, we asked several poll questions, and since the Nossaman team found the results interesting, I’m hoping some of you will as well ...

Last month, the California Supreme Court’s decision in Property Reserve v. Superior Court provided long-awaited certainty for public agencies after a court of appeal determined the often-used right of entry statutes failed to provide adequate Constitutional protection for pre-acquisition investigations and testing.  In summary, the Supreme Court held the right of entry process constitutional, with one reform:  the property owner is entitled to a jury trial on the amount of compensation. 

The decision preserves a significant tool for public agencies to keep their projects on ...

Eminent domain practitioners have been waiting for nearly two years for the Supreme Court to issue its decision in Property Reserve v. Superior Court.  At issue is the constitutionality of California's "Right of Entry" statutes, which allow an agency to enter onto private property for certain inspections and testing without filing a condemnation action.  In Property Reserve, the Court of Appeal rejected an agency's efforts to conduct precondemnation testing and inspections, finding that the statutory procedure essentially amounts to allowing a taking without payment of just ...

Every once in a while, infrastructure projects we're working on involve traversing Indian lands.  For those of you involved in such projects, you should take a look at the Final Rule published by the Department of the Interior, which went into effect last month.  The Federal Register summarizes the Final Rule as follows:

This final rule comprehensively updates and streamlines the process for obtaining Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) grants of rights-of-way on Indian land, while supporting tribal self-determination and self-governance.  This final rule further implements the ...

It's been a crazy couple weeks with the redevelopment saga continuing to play out in California.  But let's shift gears and take a breather – at least for a moment – while hundreds of redevelopment agencies continue to hang on for dear life.

I received a call today from a business owner who faced a potential eminent domain action, and the owner unforntuately did not take the appropriate steps to preserve goodwill and find a suitable relocation site.  The owner's difficult dilemma prompted me to mention an excellent article I came across a while ago from Martyn Daniel LLC