As a result of my pre-suit negotiations, court filings by METC, an entity related to ITC, include substantively modified easements that are less onerous on property owners.

The UCPA allows agencies to obtain “supervariances” that run with the land to mitigate the impacts of eminent domain takings.

A matter that I resolved recently is a good example of how, in condemnation, just compensation must be determined based on the highest and best use of property, which would include considering the impact on the future development of vacant land.

A matter that I resolved recently is a good example of how, in condemnation, just compensation must be determined based on the highest and best use of property, which would include considering the impact on the future development of vacant land.

The impacts of a taking must evaluate both the actual property being taken and the impacts upon the larger parcel, which could include other legally described properties.

South Carolina decision could become relevant to protecting the Great Lakes.

Just compensation includes not just the impact to the property actually taken but expands to include impacts to the larger parcel.

Let’s face it. Sometimes right of way agents can use questionable techniques. Here are some tactics to avoid.

ITC is adding a new phase to its Coldwater Capital Project, impacting area farmers.

210,000 gallons of crude oil leaked from Keystone Pipeline in South Dakota threatens groundwater in the area while a pipeline explosion in OrionTownship left a huge crater.

The Supreme Court of the United States applied a multi-factor test to rule that a regulation prohibiting construction on an undersized lot contiguous to a second lot under common ownership was not a taking.

This post contrasts the results obtained by a property owner who declined legal representation and negotiated his own deal versus other similarly situated owners on the same project who retained me.

A Canadian company is buying ITC for a staggering $11.3 billion.

If an agency values a property in a condemnation at an amount lower than the assessment, the owner can present the assessment to the jury.  However, the agency is not allowed to introduce evidence of the assessed value. 

SCOTUS held that an act regulating the commercial market for raisins in part by requiring farmers to deliver a portion of their crop to the government constitutes a taking requiring payment of just compensation, notwithstanding any interest that the farmer retains in the sale of those raisins or the benefits that the farmers receive through the regulation of the raisin market.  In doing so, SCOTUS refused to recognize a distinction between the public’s interest in personal versus real property. SCOTUS also reasserted that physical appropriations of private property by the government are more readily proven to be takings than regulatory takings.

ITC has suggested that a property owner can avoid an immediate condemnation if ITC is allowed to remove certain trees.  However, ITC has not promised to avoid ever condemning.  ITC cannot avoid eventually condemning the property because it must expand upon the property rights it currently enjoys in order to comply with federal regulations.  If ITC removes the trees now, as a result of a voluntarily grant provided by the property owner, ITC will avoid paying significant just compensation for those trees when it eventually condemns. This is called a “salami tactic.”