In Freeport Reg’l Water Auth. v. M&H Realty Partners VI, L.P., 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 6126 (Sept. 16, 2019), the court walked through a complicated fact pattern involving – in its simplest form – a 40-foot easement for an underground water pipeline. For our purposes, the key issues were valuing (1) the easement being acquired, (2) the severance damages caused to the remainder parcel, and (3) a temporary construction easement for the pipeline’s installation. Though it was not technically a eminent domain case because the parties had reached an agreement concerning the ...
Eminent domain cases typically revolve around one issue in dispute: the property's (or business') fair market value. And when appraisers seek to reach their opinions of value, they typically rely on a standard body of data: comparable sales; income and expense figures; and reproduction costs.
But sometimes the evidence does not fit into one of these neat boxes, either because there is a lack of "classic" evidence or because one party is seeking to adduce evidence of value in a more creative way.
A recent published decision, City of Corona v. Liston Brick Company of Corona, 2012 Cal. App ...
California Eminent Domain Report is a one-stop resource for everything new and noteworthy in eminent domain in California. We cover all aspects of eminent domain in California, including condemnation, inverse condemnation, and regulatory takings. We also keep track of current cases, project announcements, budget issues, legislative reform efforts, and report on all major California eminent domain conferences and seminars.
Stay ConnectedRSS Feed
- CLIMATE CHANGE
- Court Decisions
- GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION
- Inverse Condemnation & Regulatory Takings
- New Legislation
- Public Agency Law
- Regulatory Reform and Proposed Rules
- Right to Take