00238734

Component

https://onlinepubs.trb.or...inepubs/sr/sr76/76-015.pdf

THERE ARE TWO MAIN KINDS OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION ACTIONS WHICH ARE NOW DEVELOPING. ONE MAY BE CALLED ORDINARY INVERSE CONDEMNATION WHICH DEALS WITH REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. IN MOST TYPES, THE PROBLEMS OF PROOF AND MEASURE OF DAMAGES ARE THE SAME AS THOSE WHERE THE STATE PROCEEDS DIRECTLY TO USE ITS EMINENT DOMAIN POWER IN A REGULAR CONDEMNATION ACTION. IN ARIZONA THE RULES ARE PARALLEL TO THE SO-CALLED FEDERAL RULES, AND THERE ARE CERTAIN MEANS OF SECURING ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER A COMPLAINT. IN THESE INVERSE CONDEMNATION CASES, THE PLAINTIFF IS ALWAYS FULLY PREPARED BEFORE HIS CASE IS FILED, AND THE STATE NEEDS TIME TO FIND OUT THE FACTS AND PREPARE A POSITION. PRE-TRIAL DISCOVERY IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT IN THESE CASES. THE SECOND KIND OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION ACTION IS CALLED EXTRAORDINARY INVERSE CONDEMNATION BECAUSE IT DEALS WITH PERSONAL INJURY AND WRONGFUL DEATH CLAIMS BROUGHT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE EMINENT DOMAIN CONCEPT. WHETHER IT IS AN ORDINARY CONDEMNATION CASE OR AN INVERSE CONDEMNATION CASE, THE ORDER OF PROOF UNDER ARIZONA LAW IS IDENTICAL. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND HAS THE RIGHT TO OPEN AND CLOSE. VARIOUS CASES ARE CITED INCLUDING BOTH TYPES OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION CASES. THE RULINGS IN EXTRAORDINARY INVERSE CONDEMNATION INDICATE THAT THE DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY MAY BE ABOLISHED IN ARIZONA. ARIZONA HAS A TWO-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. HOWEVER, THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THAT NO PRIVATE PROPERTY MAY BE TAKEN OR DAMAGED FOR A PUBLIC USE WITHOUT COMPENSATION FIRST HAVING BEEN PAID. PROPERTY OWNERS TAKE THE POSITION THAT IF THIS CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION HAS ANY VALIDITY, NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS CAN EVER RUN AGAINST AN INVERSE CONDEMNATION ACTION. HOWEVER, THE GENERAL RULE APPEARS TO BE THAT WHERE THERE IS A SPECIFIC STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, IT WILL GOVERN AND BAR THE ACTION AFTER IT HAS ELAPSED.

pp 129-133. 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.

01410760

Lindas, Leonard I

pp 129-133

1962

Highway Research Board Special Report

Workshop on Highway Law

Digital/other

References

Injuries; Laws and legislation; Loss and damage; Private property; Proof; Property condemnation; Real property

Statute of limitations; Wrongful death

Highways; Law; Safety and Human Factors

TRIS, TRB

Sep 29 1994 12:00AM

• ACQUISITION THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
• CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION: PROBLEMS OF ENFORCEMENT
• CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION: THE CHALLENGE OF CHANGED CONDITIONS
• CONTROL OF ROADSIDE LAND USE, BILLBOARDS, AND SUBDIVISIONS
• GUIDE LINES FOR DETERMINING TORT LIABILITY OF HIGHWAY AGENCIES AND CONTRACTORS
• HIGHWAY LAW REVISION STUDIES: THE RESEARCHER'S VIEW
• HIGHWAY LAW REVISION STUDIES: WYOMING
• HIGHWAY LAWS RESEARCH
• HIGHWAY PROGRAMS AND HIGHWAY LAWS AND DISCUSSION
• LIABILITY FOR COST OF RELOCATING UTILITIES DUE TO HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS
• LIABILITY FOR DRAINAGE DAMAGE
• PRE-TRIAL DISCOVERY TACTICS
• PREPARATION OF APPRAISAL TESTIMONY
• STRATEGY AND TACTICS IN HIGHWAY CONDEMNATION CASES: AN ANALYSIS
• THE CHAMPION BRICK CASE: A STUDY IN THE PROOF OF VALUE
• THE CONTINUING EVOLUTION OF INVERSE CONDEMNATION
• THE FUTURE OF ABUTTERS' RIGHTS: ACCESS
• THE ROLE OF RESEARCH IN LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY
• TRIAL AIDS IN CONDEMNATION CASES
• USE OF ECONOMIC EVIDENCE IN CONDEMNATION CASES