Archive | July, 2014
HWY

No Compensation for Loss of Direct Access to a Controlled-Access Highway

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals recently held in an unpublished opinion that a property owner was not entitled to compensation when the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) removed its direct access to a controlled-access highway and replaced it with an alternate access. Hoffer Properties, LLC (“Hoffer”), owned property that abutted State Highway 19. The property had […]

Windmill Featured Image 1

Seizing Mortgages – New Cities Show Interest in Richmond’s Eminent Domain Plan

In a previous post, we discussed the city of Richmond, California, and its failure to get a supermajority vote to move forward with its plan to seize underwater mortgages through its eminent domain power. While it failed to pass the resolution, it sought other California cities, such as San Francisco, to join a joint powers authority […]

164190422-skinny

Recovery of Litigation Expenses in Wisconsin and a Landowner Attorney Gaming the System

Based on anecdotal evidence I have acquired over the years, and certainly not any rigorous research, I have concluded that Wisconsin has a fairly generous statutory scheme for compensating landowner attorneys if they meet the threshold for recovering litigation expenses. Again, solely based on personal observation, it is not uncommon for attorneys representing landowners to […]

164190422-skinny

Takings Cannot Be Too Large or Too Small: They Must Be “Just Right”

The blog www.inversecondemnation.com recently posted an article explaining the Utah Supreme Court, in Utah Dep’t of Transportation v. Carlson, No. 20120414 (June 24, 2014), addressed the issue of whether or not the Utah DOT could take excess land in order to avoid a dispute regarding severance damages. In that case, the Utah DOT took all […]