Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
(4)
Bell and Parchomovsky 871)
This having been said the demand should rest on the public entity to not only prove the public purpose of the eminent domain ruling but also to fairly compensate the owner(s) with regard not only to market value but based on other interests as well.
A takings law permits undercompensation whenever the reserve value of the property owner exceeds market price. Second, many important compensation doctrines require courts specifically to ignore different kinds of value lost to owners of taken property, such as goodwill. (5)the problem of inadequate compensation has not gone unnoticed by courts. (6) Judge Posner wrote in Coniston Corp. v. Village of Hoffman Estates:
Compensation in the constitutional sense is... not full compensation, for market value is not the value that every owner of property attaches to his property but merely the value that the marginal owner attaches to his property. Many owners are "intramarginal," meaning that because of relocation costs, sentimental attachments, or the special suitability of the property for their particular (perhaps idiosyncratic) needs, they value their property at more than its market value.... (7)
Undercompensation is both unfair and inefficient. It is unfair because it deprives property owners of part of the value of the property taken.
Bell and Parchomovsky 871)
Lastly Bell and Parchomovsky point out that the intention of the constitutional law associated with eminent domain is to restrict the rights of government and allow the individual to retain such rights as are lawful. For this reason the idea that undervaluation is the standard of due compensation is remarkable.
As Justice Black famously stated in Armstrong v. United States, "The Fifth Amendment's [just compensation] guarantee... was designed to bar Government from...
If the public is given this option and understands that they will have to pay more dearly for the demanded use of eminent domain, they are more likely to catch the bad deals that often befall individual owners and restore the deterrent aspect of the constitutional takings laws. In so doing the public may become more conscious of the need to make more informed decisions about the rights of the individual, regardless of the desire of the political entity attempting to take land at rates that are not fair to land owners, the people the constitution was meant to protect.
Works Cited
Aguirre, Adalberto, and Frances Vu. "Eminent Domain and City Redevelopment in California: An Overview and Case Study." Social Justice 33.3 (2006): 101.
Bell, Abraham, and Gideon Parchomovsky. "Taking Compensation Private." Stanford Law Review 59.4 (2007): 871.
Margolis, Bruce S. "Getting Started in Eminent Domain Valuations; CPAs Are Well Qualified to Perform Services in This Expanding Field." Journal of Accountancy 170.6 (1990): 63.
Morandi, Larry. "Eminent Domain Legislation by State." Public Management Dec. 2005: 9.
Talley, Brett. "Restraining Eminent Domain through Just Compensation: Kelo V. City of New London." Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 29.2 (2006): 759.
Works Cited
Aguirre, Adalberto, and Frances Vu. "Eminent Domain and City Redevelopment in California: An Overview and Case Study." Social Justice 33.3 (2006): 101.
Bell, Abraham, and Gideon Parchomovsky. "Taking Compensation Private." Stanford Law Review 59.4 (2007): 871.
Margolis, Bruce S. "Getting Started in Eminent Domain Valuations; CPAs Are Well Qualified to Perform Services in This Expanding Field." Journal of Accountancy 170.6 (1990): 63.
Morandi, Larry. "Eminent Domain Legislation by State." Public Management Dec. 2005: 9.
.." Bright 83) The utilization of eminent domain has been used to evict individuals to build malls, concentrated housing projects for both the poor and the affluent, and business parks, all of which presumably have higher property tax bases and therefore better serve the community where they are built than the homes that were there previously. Having recently received a grant award, in the amount of 500,000 from the ACLU, Homeowners' Freedom, a
In this case, "the government must prove that it tried to negotiate the sale and that the takeover is for public use. If the government wins, an appraiser establishes fair market value and the property owner is paid and evicted," (Bryant n.d.). In cases like KELO et al. v. CITY of NEW LONDON et al., the property owner refused to sell and the matter went to court. In most
Kelo v. New London and Eminent Domain When the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut in February of 2005, the issue legally speaking was a seemingly straightforward matter of Fifth Amendment jurisprudence. What was at stake as a point of Constitutional law was the last clause of the Fifth Amendment, generally referred to as the "takings clause." The actual
land use and economic development. There is a hypothetical land parcel near freeway on- and off-ramps, several acres in size, owned by the Smith family, on which developers plan to build a casino. Citizen Opposition There will be significant opposition to building a casino by a small group of vocal and highly visible opponents. Many of the opponents will be affiliated with churches, and possibly environmentalist and social activist organizations as
" The public outcry against the Kelo decision confirms that citizens simply do not trust the government when it comes to their personal property. Definitions and Meanings Justice Sandra Day O'Connor strongly opposed the majority decision (Urbigkit, 2006). She wrote, "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with
" (GAO, 2006) Issues involved are stated to include "the dispersal of residents in low-income communities to other neighborhoods or cities." (GAO, 2006) it is stated that an inherent right of "sovereignty, eminent domain in a government's power to take private property for a public use while fairly compensating the property owners." (GAO, 2006) There have been actions in state legislatures toward prohibition of "certain eminent domain practices, such as preventing