Eminent Domain and Fair Market Value in a Depressed Real Estate Market (2014) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 36-39
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 36... ...
36 there is some evidence that distributive justice principles have influenced legislatures to enact laws that authorize additional compensation to cover certain losses suffered because of a taking.419 No transportation department responding to the survey reported that during the real estate crisis its agency or the courts in its jurisdiction had permitted the use of distributive justice principles when determining just compensation such as by allowing compensation for an owner's subjective or sentimental loss (e.g., the taking of an owner's home or of a family homestead of long duration)
|
From page 37... ...
37 Legislation proposed in Connecticut would increase the level of compensation for property acquired through eminent domain by a development agency to 125 percent of its average appraised value.429 In Indiana when property is condemned that is a person's primary residence, state law requires the payment of compensation at a rate equal to 150 percent of the fair market value of the property.430 One commentator notes that Kansas law authorizes the use of eminent domain for private economic development purposes but states that "the legislature shall consider requiring compensation of at least 200% of fair market value [for] property owners…."431 In Kansas, when taking property for an "auto race track facility" a city must pay an additional amount equal to 25 percent of the compensation or damage "finally awarded…with respect to any property" taken.432 London, 64 WASH & LEE L
|
From page 38... ...
38 more years."438 The Supreme Court of Missouri recently held that adding heritage value to the fair market value of a condemned property does not violate the Missouri Constitution.439 As for the legislature's intent in enacting provisions to increase just compensation in certain circumstances, the process of revising Missouri's eminent domain laws began in 2002 when some groups complained that the government unfairly took private land for a trail project.440 The legislature was unsuccessful in making any changes to the state's eminent domain laws until after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kelo in 2005. The heritage value and homestead taking provisions were added to protect property owners by increasing the compensation that must be paid when property is taken in certain situations.
|
From page 39... ...
39 are being so taken, located upon adjoining lands owned or held by such party, the probable damages to such business which the denial of the use of the property so taken may reasonably cause….446 In Idaho, an unsuccessful bill that was offered in the Senate would have added Section 7-727 to the state's Eminent Domain Code to require that "[a] ny displaced person who moves or discontinues a business…shall receive a fixed location payment…not less than [$2,500]
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.