|
|
|
Title: STRATEGY AND TACTICS IN HIGHWAY CONDEMNATION CASES: AN ANALYSIS
Accession Number: 00238724
Record Type: Component
Abstract: THE MEANS BY WHICH THE VARIOUS STATES ACQUIRE RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR PUBLIC HIGHWAYS THROUGH CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS ARE DESCRIBED. THE PROCEDURE IN ALL STATES REQUIRES THAT THERE BY JUSTIFICATION FOR ALL CASES AND IF THERE IS ANY DOUBT AS TO THE PROPRIETY OF THE AWARD OF THE DAMAGES THAT HAVE BEEN RECEIVED, STEPS SHOULD BE TAKEN TO PRESERVE THE POINT FOR FURTHER REVIEW BY A JURY OR OTHERWISE AS THE STATE LAWS REQUIRE. THERE ARE TWO GENERAL AREAS IN WHICH IT IS MOST DIFFICULT TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY: (1) IF A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN ACQUIRED THROUGH NEGOTIATION WITH THE OWNER THERE SHOULD BE SOME INDICATION TO THE ATTORNEY THAT THE APPRAISALS ON THE CONDEMNED PROPERTY INVOLVED OR THE DETERMINATION OF VALUE BASED ON THE APPRAISALS HAVE BEEN REASONABLE, (2) IF THE NEGOTIATOR WAS COMPETENT BUT AN UNUSUAL NUMBER OF OWNERS HAVE FAILED TO AGREE, THERE MUST BE WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION OF THE ACTION OF THE ATTORNEY OF THE CONDEMNOR. PROCEDURES FOR THE SELECTION OF A JURY FOR A CONDEMNATION CASE ARE DESCRIBED. IN MISSOURI THE POLICY IS FOLLOWED OF HAVING AN ATTORNEY IN THE DEPARTMENT VIEW EVERY PROPERTY BEFORE IT IS DEMOLISHED. THE OPENING STATEMENT TO THE JURY AND TECHNIQUES OF QUESTIONING WITNESSES ARE DISCUSSED. ONE OF THE BIG DIFFERENCES IN THE TESTIMONY OF THE CONDEMNING AUTHORITY AND THE LANDOWNER MAY RESULT FROM THE DIFFERENCES IN THEIR VIEWS AS TO THE STATUS OF FIXTURES. A CONSISTENT TREND IS FOUND TOWARD EXPANSION OF THE DEFINITION OF REAL PROPERTY BY THE COURTS TO INCLUDE TRADE FIXTURES. ACCESS RIGHTS AND PARTIAL TAKINGS ARE DISCUSSED. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT IN HIS ARGUMENT TO THE JURY AFTER ALL EVIDENCE IS CLOSED, THE ADVOCATE FOR THE CONDEMNING AUTHORITY SHOULD ATTEMPT TO DO THE FOLLOWING: (1) POINT OUT TO THE JURY THAT THE POSITION OF THE AUTHORITY IS THAT JUST COMPENSATION BE AWARDED, (2) THAT THE WITNESSES FOR THE AUTHORITY HAVE NOT HAD AND COULD NOT HAVE ANY PERSONAL INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME OF THE TRIAL, (3) ITEMIZE THE SPECIAL BENEFITS THAT THE OWNER IS RECEIVING, IF ANY, AS THE RESULT OF THE CONTEMPLATED IMPROVEMENT, (4) ENUMERATE COMPARABLE SALES WHICH HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED AS SUCH DURING THE COURSE OF THE TESTIMONY. (5) EMPHASIZE CONCESSIONS MADE BY LANDOWNER'S EXPERTS IN THE COURSE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, AND (6) EMPHASIZE THE PROCEDURE USED BY THE AUTHORITY AND THE DETAILS APPEARING IN THE TESTIMONY TO ARRIVE AT A FAIR VALUATION OF THE DAMAGES AT ISSUE.
Supplemental Notes: pp 38-50. Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Monograph Title: Monograph Accession #: 01410760
Corporate Authors: Highway Research Board (HRB) Washington, DC Authors: Hyder, Robert LDiscussers: Canada, Robert D; Williams, Glenn A; Thomson, James E; Carlson, Robert F
Pagination: pp 38-50
Publication Date: 1962
Conference:
Workshop on Highway Law
Location:
Wisconsin, United States Media Type: Digital/other
Features: References
TRT Terms: Old TRIS Terms: Subject Areas: Economics; Finance; Highways; Law; Society
Files: TRIS, TRB
Created Date: Sep 29 1994 12:00AM
More Articles from this Serial Issue:
|
