Eminent domain actions are unique in that "the court, rather than the jury, typically decides questions concerning the preconditions to recovery of a particular type of compensation, even if the determination turns on contested issues of fact." (See Emeryville Redevelopment Agency v. Harcros Pigments, Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1083, 1116.) This is consistent with the general rule in eminent domain that the jury’s role is only to determine the amount of damages, leaving other questions to be resolved by the Court. While these factual disputes are typically decided by the judge ...
As an eminent domain attorney, a litigated outcome nearly always comes with the satisfaction (or devastation) of realizing that you have won or lost. Sure, sometimes the jury splits (in fact, that probably happens most of the time), but the result can be placed in the context of the settlement negotiations that took place leading to the trial.
A verdict much better than the settlement possibility feels like a "win" and a verdict much worse than an offered settlement understandably feels like a "loss." It's really pretty simple.
But I have not had enough decisions to have empirical ...
Last year I saw Win Win, a movie starring Paul Giamatti, Amy Ryan and Jeffrey Tambor. The movie, besides receiving critical acclaim, had two hooks for me. One, the protagonist in the movie is an attorney. I am a sucker for almost any lawyer movie. (I still say My Cousin Vinny is one of the best 50 movies of the past 50 years.) And two, the movie included wrestling. No, not the Hulk Hogan and Macho Man Randy Savage stuff. I mean the real folkstyle wrestling that occurs every 4 years at the Olympics and at the collegiate level.
My dad was a college wrestler, which is probably why ...
On January 19, 2012, the California Court of Appeal issued an unpublished decision addressing this very question. Specifically, in Flying J, Inc. v. Department of Transportation, Case No. F060545, the Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff's claim for lost profits, finding that plaintiff's evidence was not sufficiently comparable in character and its calculations relied on too much conjecture about future events.
Plaintiff Flying J operates truck stops. In 1997, it purchased an 18.8 acre parcel adjacent to State Routes 14 and 58 in the Mojave ...
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