Archive | Eminent Domain

Games Condemnors Play: When Appraisers Lose Credibility

  In his book, “Expert Witness in the Legal System: A Scientist’s Search for Justice,” Morris S. Zedek wrote that in 2001, the Committee on Criminal Advocacy of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York surveyed judges about the prevalence of perjury in the New York metropolitan area. In regard to expert witnesses, of the thirty judges who responded, 50 percent said they encountered occasional perjury. This is not surprising to a trial lawyer. In condemnation cases, most reputable appraisers do not commit perjury. They may… read more

Posted in Appraisers, Eminent Domain, Highest and Best Use, New York, Recent cases, Trial Preparation
Read more > 0

Time to Curb Developers from Controlling Condemnation Litigation

If you are reading an appellate court decision deciding a condemnor’s appeal from an award your client recovered and the Court quotes Judge Cardozo in New York, O. & W.R. Co. v. Livingston, 238 NY 300 (1924), it’s not good. This is the case where Judge Cardozo wrote that “it is the duty of the state ,in the conduct of the inquest by which the compensation is ascertained, to see that it is just, not merely to the individual whose property is taken, but to the public which is to… read more

Posted in Condemnation Procedures, Eminent Domain, Eminent Domain Abuse, Future of the law, New York, Offer & Compensation, Recent cases, Valuation
Read more > 0

Third Department Gets The Project Influence Rule Right

The Third Department got it right in Matter of State of New York v KKS Properties, LLC, __ AD3d __, (July 3, 2014). The lower court’s decision in KKS Properties, LLC is one of those decisions that makes you cringe. An award on an appropriation claim in the Court of Claims which is lower than the advance payment resulting in a judgment in favor of the State is an outrageous outcome for a compulsory taking of one’s property. We have often advocated that there must be a minimum of “just compensation.”… read more

Posted in Eminent Domain, Project Influence Rule, Published Articles, Recent cases
Read more > 0

New York’s Judicial View

New York is one of three states in the Union that does not provide for jury trials in eminent domain cases. All of our trials are by the court. But New York’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law does provide a very important provision: the judicial view. Section 510 of the EDPL states: (A) The trial court shall view the property in all claims, unless waived by stipulation of the parties. The parties to the suit or claim, may attend the viewing by the court at a time scheduled by the court…. read more

Posted in Eminent Domain, Judicial view, New York
Read more > 0

California Supreme Court Grants Review in Property Reserve Case

In our June 5, 2014 posting we reported a significant California Case, Property Reserve, Inc v Superior Court, 224 Cal. App. 4th 828 (2014). In Property Reserve, the Third District California Court of Appeal ruled that entry statutes are unconstitutional when the activities for which entry is sought constitute an intentional taking of property without the full protections offered by a condemnation action. For separate reasons, the Court of Appeal found that both the geological and environmental studies would effect a taking or intentional damage of property; thus the filing… read more

Posted in Eminent Domain, Eminent Domain Abuse, Entry Statutes, Future of the law
Read more > 0