BLOG: Court Decisions
California Court: Pre-condemnation Entry Statute Unconstitutional
A California appellate court recently declared its pre-condemnation entry statute unconstitutional. Property Reserve, Inc. v. Dep’t of Water Resources (JCCP No. 4594, March 13, 2014). While we are not going to recount all the details of the comprehensive opinion here, the State was seeking access to private property pre-condemnation in connection with a proposed tunnel... Read More
Newark Property Owner Snuffed on Damage Claim After Dismissal of Taking
A New Jersey appellate court recently decided the sequel to a failed condemnation action from 2012 regarding property in Newark. The property in question was commercial property owned in condominium form by New United Corp. and the Essex County Improvement Authority (“ECIA”), containing five buildings and a parking garage. Due to prior disputes between the... Read More
Appeals Court: Hearing Was Required Regarding Impact of Wetlands
On May 6, 2014, the Appellate Division published its opinion in New Jersey Transit v. Mori (Docket No. A-0122-12T4). The case involved acquisition of property impacted by wetlands regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers. Plaintiff’s estimate of compensation for the one acre (out of fourteen) partial taking was $61,000 given the presence of wetlands... Read More
Netherlands v State – Regulatory Taking Denied
“The State may not put so potent a Hobbesian stick into the Lockean bundle.” Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606, 627 (2001). That was the United States Supreme Court’s response thirteen years ago to Rhode Island’s argument that property owners could claim no loss from legislation shaping and defining property rights enacted prior to... Read More
Experts' Valuation Arguments Rejected as Net Opinion in Hoboken Taking
Hudson County Assignment Judge Peter Bariso recently rejected a property owner’s argument that the date of value should be a date earlier than the commencement of condemnation action on August 23, 2012. City of Hoboken v. Ponte Equities, Inc. (Docket No. HUD-L-4095-12). The property owner argued that the date of value should have been June... Read More
Undersized Lot Receives Variance From Court to Avoide Inverse Condemnation Claim
While not our prototypical condemnation case, a trial judge in Ocean County aptly reversed a local zoning board in Jerman v. Tp. of Manchester (Docket No. OCN-L-1844-13). If affirmed the zoning board’s denial of a bulk variance that would have zoned the property into inutility; that is, it would have rendered the property valueless and would thereby... Read More
Beach Erosion Caused by Jetties May Constitute a Taking
The latest in a long-running dispute between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and lake-front property owners in Michigan, whose beaches have allegedly been washed away because of jetties installed by the Army Corps long ago, is a ruling from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the takings’ claims... Read More
NJ Supreme Court Adds Two Redevelopment Related Cases to Docket
The first case is In re: Petition for Referendum to Repeal Ordinance 2354-12 of the Tp. of West Orange. The certified question: “Was plaintiffs’ action challenging the municipal redevelopment ordinance time barred and, if not, was the ordinance invalid because of the municipality’s failure to submit an application for approval of the issuance of bonds to... Read More
Rails to Trails Case on Supreme Court Docket
Signing off on 2013 and looking towards 2014, an interesting case with property rights implications is scheduled for argument before the United States Supreme Court on January 14, 2014. The case is captioned Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States. The Court certified the following question for briefing and argument: “This case involves the... Read More
Arkansas Game Remand Equals Just Compensation for Property Owner
Almost a year to the date after the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the governmental taking caused by an Army Corps controlled flooding program was compensable. The Circuit Court “affirm[ed] the judgment of the Court... Read More
