Eminent Domain Report

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 ...