Florida Eminent Domain Blog | Gregory W. Stoner

Severance Damages and the Reduction of Value of the Remaining Property

2009-06-21T14:41:00.000-07:00

Eminent domain may be used to condemn (take) entire properties, but for many projects, especially road widening or improvement, eminent domain is used only to condemn parts of properties. In this case, the condemning authority must pay not only the value of the part of the property that is taken, but must also pay for the impact on the rest of the property caused by the loss of the portion. This is known as severance damages, and is one of the main areas where utilizing an eminent domain attorney can be of great value to you.

There are many ways in which the loss of a portion of property can affect the value of the remaining property. Let's first consider a residential property. When a road widening or improvement project requires the condemnation of the front of a residential property there are many ways in which the remaining property may be decreased in value. Setback from the road (which is likely to be busier following widening) is reduced, which will affect the resale value of the house. Old-growth trees may have to be removed, along with hedges or fences that blocked the road from the front of the house.

The value of a business may also suffer from the partial taking. It may lose parking spaces, aesthetic arbors, benches, outside dining areas, even part of the building as a result of the partial taking. All of these may impact the viability of a business, and should be included as part of severance damages.

If the property is not considered viable for its current use following the condemnation, then a cure must be part of the eminent domain settlement. Examples of non-viable properties are businesses with too few parking spaces, or structures where part of the building must be torn down as part of the condemnation. In these cases, the condemning authority and the property owner can both present cures to make the property viable again after the condemnation, such as rebuilding or modifying a house, rearranging parking spaces, creating a patio area on top of a restaurant to compensate for one lost out front, etc.

In some cases, once the partial taking is effected, the remaining property may violate zoning ordinances. For example, a house may no longer have a legal setback from the widened road. This will depreciate the remaining property further, increasing compensation, and in some cases it may mean that the condemning authority must compensate the property owner for the full property. In other cases, the zoning authority may grant a variance for that property which may restore some of the value.

The calculation of severance damages in the case of a partial condemnation is a complicated process. The eminent domain lawyers at The Florida Property Law Firm, P.A. can help you negotiated them and get full compensation for your lost property. Please schedule a partial condemnation consultation today to learn how we can help.

Prejudgment Interest for Florida Eminent Domain Compensation

2009-05-19T14:38:00.000-07:00

According to Florida law, part of full compensation for your property taken through eminent domain is "prejudgment interest." This interest is applied to the difference between what was offered to you by the government as its "good faith" offer of compensation and the value of your property (or partial property, including severance damages) as determined by trial for the time period between when your property was taken and the final trial date (after all appeals, if any). (For more explanation, see The Condemnation Process.) But what is actually included in this prejudgment interest?

The Florida Supreme Court decided this question (which it considered to be "of great public importance") in Boulis v. Florida Department of Transportation. According to the Court, the question hinges on the language that "full compensation is determined 'by reference to the state of affairs that would have existed absent any condemnation proceeding whatsoever'" and by the statutory requirement that interest is applicable to all expenses incurred as a result of the eminent domain proceedings. This means that interest applies not only to the full difference between the condemning authority's "good faith" offer and the trial decision, but also to any "reasonable" expenses incurred by the property owner during the proceedings.

However, it is important to note two caveats. First, the court has the right to determine what constitutes "reasonable" expenses. In the precedent case, Boulis was billed by an expert he employed for $35,308, but the court determined that only $16,200 of that was considered "reasonable." So Boulis was responsible for nearly $20,000 out of pocket, a reminder that it is good to know what constitutes "reasonable" fees in the eyes of the court. Second, the court said that interest would only apply from the date that the expense was incurred, not from the date the condemning authority took title, unlike the rest of your full compensation.

At the Florida Property Rights Law Firm, P.A., we have experience with experts in numerous disciplines and can help you avoid getting stuck with out of pocket expenses for unreasonable experts' fees. We also remind you that normally our fees are paid for by the condemning authority and do not reduce your payment in any way.

To learn more about eminent domain and how we can help you, please schedule an eminent domain consultation today.

Martin County Commissioners Approve Changes to Eminent Domain Rules

2009-04-20T14:34:00.000-07:00

In many cases when the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) or other condemning authority uses eminent domain for a road project, the result is a partial taking, in which only part of your property is taken. Sometimes the part of your property sought is just a thin strip along the edge, maybe a foot wide, and sometimes it is half the lot or more. In some cases, the portion of property remaining is not legally sufficient to support a home or a business, and in these cases the condemning authority may be forced to purchase the entire property. In any case of partial taking, the condemning authority would be forced to pay severance damages sufficient to effect what is known as a "cure," plus any residual damage to the remaining property not able to be cured.

A cure is a plan to restore maximal use to the property subject to a partial taking. What constitutes a sufficient cure is determined by the court and, in most cases, with reference to local zoning ordinances.

But not so in Martin County any more. On March 3, Martin County Commissioners approved a proposal by FDOT to change the way partial takings are considered. According to the new rules, the county Board of Zoning Adjustments has the power to waive county regulations on property severed by partial takings. Regulations that might be waived include the minimum lot size allowed for a residential house or the minimum number of parking spaces required for a business. This may allow FDOT and other condemning authorities to offer cut-rate cures that leave homeowners with tiny, inadequate lots, and businesses with insufficient parking to remain viable.

The approval came over the objections of the Martin County Local Planning Agency, whose chairman objected, "Eminent domain should never be easy and it shouldn't be fast." In addition, the chairman said, "the property owner needs as much protection as they can possibly get."

Commissioners also voted to apply the new rules to the Indian Street Bridge Project, which will connect Palm City and Stuart over the St. Lucie River.

FDOT is floating similar proposals in numerous counties throughout the state. If your county commissioners are considering such a proposal, tell them to stand up for your right to full compensation and just cures following partial takings.

If your property is subject to a partial taking, you need an eminent domain lawyer with the experience and expertise to propose adequate cures and get them accepted by a jury. Please call or email us today to schedule a severance damages consultation with the Florida Property Rights Law Firm, P.A.

Marion County Offers $1.65 Million for Proposed School Property

2009-03-18T14:02:00.000-07:00

In an attempt to ease overcrowding, the Marion County School District has proposed the construction of a new elementary school in the near future and a possible middle school later on. The new schools, which will be located in Silver Springs Shores, are intended to reduce overcrowding, which has grown severe in the southeastern part of Marion County. The School Board agreed to begin condemnation procedures and offer the owner a total of $1.65 million for the property. This is $25,000 per acre, about 14 % below the owner's asking price.

The plan is that construction the elementary school will begin in late 2010 or early 2011. The plan is that the elementary school would be built first, and the middle school later as a separate campus but on adjacent property. This would allow for the construction of common buildings, like a cafeteria and library, that could be used by both schools. The plan is similar to that already used for Hammett Bowen Jr. Elementary and Liberty Middle School in Ocala.

When crowding begins to affect instruction, we can all agree that schools have to be built, but that does not mean you have to take the government's first offer. Your property is your property, and you deserve full compensation. You may at first feel hesitant to ask more from a school district when you hear about teachers being laid off, but remember that capital funds (used for construction of new buildings, including the cost of eminent domain takings) are legally separate from funds used to pay teachers' salaries and fund school programs. You will not be taking one dollar out of teachers' pockets.

If a school construction or other public use project has put your property in danger of condemnation, you need an experienced eminent domain lawyer who can help you fight for your property and get the maximum compensation if you cannot stop the taking. Please schedule a condemnation consultation at the Florida Property Law Firm, P.A. today to learn how we can help.

Stimulus Money May Lead to an Increase in Eminent Domain in Florida

2009-03-11T13:55:00.000-07:00

The Stimulus Package signed into law by President Barack Obama on February 17, 2009 includes $ 317.7 billion in direct government spending. Of this money, over $1 billion is slated for infrastructure and housing projects in Florida. And most, if not all of those projects, will require the use of eminent domain.

Florida law prohibits the use of eminent domain merely for the removal of urban blight or the promotion of private, ostensibly job-creating enterprises, but most infrastructure improvements will require the use of eminent domain.

Road widening, road improvements, and new roads are probably the most common project that requires eminent domain. However, the creation of public services, from recreation centers to courthouses also often requires the use of eminent domain. The Department of Education has been given a huge chunk of the stimulus package, $41.5 billion, and, though much of it is slated for new subsidized student loans, some of it will go to the renovation of old schools and the construction of new ones.

Energy and environmental projects received nearly a third of the total budget, just shy of $100 billion. Energy projects that may require eminent domain in Florida include wind generation plants, solar energy plants, and experimental tidal energy plants. Environmental projects that may require the use of eminent domain in Florida include environmental offsets for road projects, expansions of protected areas, and reclamation of deserted (and possibly polluted) industrial sites.

No matter what the cause or the condemning authority, eminent domain usually means that you will lose your property, although we will fight for your property to the full extent possible. In this time of depressed real estate values, it is even more crucial that you fight for full compensation when all or part of your property is taken, including severance damages. Please call or email us today to schedule an eminent domain consultation with the Florida Property Rights Law Firm, P.A.

Eminent Domain Representation for Foreign Owners of Florida Property

2009-03-05T13:52:00.000-08:00

Many people from the UK, Canada, and elsewhere own property in Florida. The combination of mild weather year-round, miles and miles of beaches, and beautiful water draws people from all around the world to Florida. And Florida is chosen over many other possible tropical locales because the rule of law guarantees your investment to a greater extent than in other places. But when eminent domain threatens your property, you need a lawyer with expertise in Florida's laws to protect your investment, fight the taking, and ensure you get the full value for your property. Whether you are the owner of a business, vacation home, or an investment property, you are entitled to full compensation if the government uses eminent domain to take your property. And the attorneys at the Florida Property Rights Law Firm are prepared to fight for the property rights of all foreign owners.

For the purposes of eminent domain, foreign owners have the same rights as domestic owners of Florida property. However, logistically, your situation is very different. You may be unaware that your property may be the subject of a taking until you receive an offer from the government. Do not be fooled: this offer is often far below market value and rarely represents the amount you can receive for compensation. Review our information about the eminent domain process and you will see that it takes several steps before the final value of compensation is established.

The eminent domain lawyers at The Florida Property Rights Law Firm can serve as your intermediaries in this process. We will fight to get you the maximum possible compensation for your property, whether for a full or partial taking. If you have received an offer from any Florida or US government entity and want representation to protect your property or help get the maximum value, call or email us about your eminent domain case today.

Key Largo Land Buys Show Disparity between Estimated and Real Land Value

2008-12-29T15:57:00.000-08:00

Monroe County, Florida officials went to Tallahassee last month to try and get some unbuildable Florida Keys land declared the nation's 59th national park. They say this is the only way to get the $1.2 billion necessary to purchase the land and protect it under the islands' strict environmental rules. The land is all classified as Tier 1 and Tier 2, meaning they have the most sensitive populations of plants and animals according to the county's classification system.

The estimate for the cost of the land comes from the realities the county faced in eminent domain proceedings. In 2002, they settled a longstanding case that involved a temporary taking of land from 1982 to 1990, when the county finally bought the land for $5.9 million. The settlement, for damages suffered by the landowner from the date of the taking until paid in 2002, including annually compounded interest, was $6 million, but the county knew it could pay over $40 million if the case went to trial.

In May of this year, the county was ordered by a jury to pay $5.5 million in full compensation for two parcels of land that state appraisers had only valued at a total of $115,000. The county had paid what it considered to be a generous $630,000 for both parcels, but the owners took the cases to court and won--big.

If a government agency uses eminent domain to take your land, don't take their word for the value, and don't take their first offer--no matter how generous it may seem--without first consulting with a Florida eminent domain lawyer. If you are being threatened with a taking, schedule a free eminent domain consultation with the Florida Property Rights Law Firm, PA.

A Legal Challenge to the Beach and Shore Preservation Act: Part 2

2008-11-10T14:00:00.000-08:00

In considering the decision of the Florida Court of Appeals, District 1, the Florida Supreme Court rephrased the question at issue in the case as a question of eminent domain:

On its face, does the Beach and Shore Preservation Act unconstitutionally deprive upland owners of littoral rights without just compensation?

To decide the question, the Court considered many factors. First, it considered the nature of the Act and its relationship to the State of Florida's Constitution. It described the Act as part of the Constitution's statement that "It shall be the policy of the state to conserve and protect its natural resources and scenic beauty," and the protections in the Act as regards the littoral rights of the upland property owner. The Court even pointed out that the Act stipulates that "[i]f an authorized beach restoration, beach nourishment, and erosion control project cannot reasonably be accomplished without the taking of private property, the taking must be made by the requesting authority by eminent domain proceedings."

Next, the Court considered what exactly are the common law littoral rights possessed by beach property owners. It described the common-law understanding, deriving from English common law, that in actuality the state owns all waterways and beaches between the high- and low-water marks. The Court said that beachfront property owners actually have "no rights in navigable waters and sovereignty lands that are superior to other members of the public in regard to bathing, fishing, and navigation." Instead, the Court said, upland property owners held several special or exclusive rights, which it described as easements incident to their property, which are considered property rights that may not be taken without just compensation. These easements are:

The right to have access to the water
The right to reasonably use the water
The right to accretion and reliction
The right to the unobstructed view of the water

If any of these rights are to be divested from the upland property, then it is to be considered a taking and requires an eminent domain proceeding.

The Court of Appeals decided that the Act was unconstitutional because it denied the upland owners of the right to accretion without an eminent domain hearing. The Supreme Court, on the other hand, said that the common-law doctrine of avulsion applied in this case. Avulsion describes a situation in which a catastrophic change in the shoreline occurs that could represent serious damage to either the public or private portion of a littoral property. In these cases, the line between public and private property is maintained at the place established before, regardless of the de facto changes in the shoreline. Because the Act pertains specifically to events in which catastrophic erosion threatens a beach, the Supreme Court determined that avulsion is central to the Act and therefore gives rationale to the establishment of an Erosion Control Line that stops property changes as a result of accretion and reliction.

Beachfront property rights are complicated, and if you are to protect your rights against the actions of government entities, you need the help of an experienced eminent domain lawyer. Contact the Florida Property Rights Law Firm, P.A. today to schedule a beach property rights consultation to make sure you get just compensation if your rights are infringed.

A Legal Challenge to the Beach and Shore Preservation Act: Part 1

2008-10-31T08:40:00.000-07:00

Following Hurricane Opal (1995), the Florida Department of Environmental Protection placed the beaches of Walton County and the City of Destin on its list of critically eroded beaches, which initiated the process of beach restoration through renourishment, according to the process described in Florida's Beach and Shore Preservation Act. In response to this action, several homeowners in the area and other interested parties formed Stop the Beach Renourishment (STBR), Inc, and filed two petitions for hearings. The first petition challenged the issuance of the permit for renourishment, and the second challenging the constitutionality of the Beach and Shore Preservation Act.

At issue was a particular aspect of the Beach and Shore Preservation Act, which allows the state to draw a new dividing line between publicly owned beach and privately owned upland known as the erosion control line (ECL) which is placed at the mean high water level (MHWL) determined by a beach survey. In its petition, STBR claimed that the establishment of the ECL constitutes and illegal taking of property rights because it divests the common law littoral rights from the properties of beachfront property owners, including the right to accretion as a result of natural processes, essentially making them inland property owners. Although the Beach and Shore Preservation Act substitutes some specific forms of littoral rights, STBR claimed that these rights were an inadequate substitute for the common law littoral rights eliminated by the establishment for the ECL.

STBR won this challenge in the First District Court of Appeals, which stated that the Beach and Shore Preservation Act did, in fact, take from beachfront property its direct access to the water since it established a de facto shoreline at the ECL.

However, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection would appeal this decision and take the challenge to the Florida Supreme Court, which would issue its decision on September 29th, and which we shall discuss in detail next blog.

Many people purchase Florida property specifically for the beachfront, counting on the value of the littoral rights associated with the property to constitute the majority of the property's value. If you feel your beachfront property rights are being improperly appropriated as a part of an eminent domain procedure or an illegal form of taking, schedule an eminent domain consultation with a Florida eminent domain lawyer at the Florida Property Rights Law Firm, PA.

You Are Not Alone in Your Eminent Domain Fight!

2008-09-04T11:03:00.000-07:00

One of the worst effects of eminent domain, even before you lose your property, is the sense that you are a powerless individual being brushed aside by the power of government. However, you are not alone in your fight against eminent domain, and if you get in contact with others, you can rally your power to stop eminent domain from taking your home, your business, or any part thereof.

First, remember that very few eminent domain projects involve the taking of just one property. In most cases, the proposed project involves a taking or partial taking of property from many different property owners. Your community, you and your neighbors, are all in this together. Even if you do not know your neighbors especially well, even if you have rarely spoken to them, now is the time when you can band together into a force to resist the process of eminent domain.

Next, there are many national and local organizations prepared to help you organize your defense against eminent domain. One of the most prominent is the Institute for Justice's Castle Coalition. The Castle Coalition is a grassroots property rights activism center dedicated to the education and organization of home and small-business owners in the fight against eminent domain. In addition, there are many other national organizations that help people resist eminent domain. This includes business-oriented organizations such as the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB), as well as civil rights organizations such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), even multidenominational religious organizations such s the National Council of Churches in Christ in the USA (NCC).

But your best ally in the fight against eminent domain is a skilled eminent domain lawyer. Please contact the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm today for a free consultation.

Widening of Atlantic Avenue in Palm Beach Takes 4 More Parcels of Land

2008-08-22T08:53:00.000-07:00

Palm Beach County commissioners continue to increase the amount of land they want to take using eminent domain for a proposed widening of West Atlantic Avenue from a two-lane rural roadway into a four-lane divided roadway with accommodations for a future six-lane roadway. The improvement is planned to run from 1,330 west of Lyons Road to Starkey Road, and will include modification of Lyons road north of Atlantic Avenue for 400 feet. In a recent county commission meeting, four more properties were added to the list of those to be taken, increasing the list to 23 properties to be wholly or partially taken.

The improvement is proposed for the purposes of making Atlantic Avenue safer. As a direct route from State Road 7 to the Florida Turnpike through unincorporated Palm Beach County, the stretch of road is heavily traveled, making the current two-lane configuration dangerous. Funding for construction, design, and right-of-way acquisition has been provided by a coalition of local developers and Palm Beach County. The local developers include the owner of the four parcels added during the March 31st commission meeting, Ascot Development.

The fair market value of the four additional parcels was put at $205,000.

If your property is being threatened by the proposed widening of a roadway or other types of public use, you don't have to accept it. Contact the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm for a free initial consultation and evaluation of your case to get help in resisting the taking or at least receiving full compensation.

Riviera Beach: Stopping Eminent Domain in Its Tracks

2008-07-11T14:03:00.000-07:00

Riviera Beach in Palm Beach County is a community of contrasts. A thin strip of land running from the Lake Worth Lagoon to the interior of the Florida Peninsula, the city has a wide distribution of socioeconomic classes, from the rich residents of Singer Island to the relatively impoverished people sandwiched in the urban corridor between Broadway and I-95. Because of this economic disparity, Riviera Beach has had a revenue problem for many years, with the 12.5 % of the population on Singer Island representing almost 50 % of the tax base for the community. So, when taxes have to be raised, they disproportionately affect these upper-class residents, who feel they are being swamped with taxes for which they receive little or no services. To correct this problem, Riviera Beach sought to essentially double its upper-class population.

Utilizing eminent domain, the city hoped to take the mainland coast across from Singer Island and give it to a private developer who would make it into an "International Harbor Village," with exculsive shops, restaurants, and residencies. Currently, the homes are largely middle-class beachfront property, some of the rare beachfront property in Florida affordable to people making a moderate income, and many of them did not want to give up their homes. Numerous cases were filed, not only by residents, but by activist groups on the behalf of residents, but the city stood firm on its commitment to take the land.

Then the state enacted its post-Kelo revision of eminent domain laws to state that eminent domain could not normally be used to transfer land from one private owner to another, but must, instead, be used for a legitimate public purpose. At first, Riviera Beach considered trying to circumvent the law, then, on November 17, 2006, the city backed down.

If you are facing eminent domain, and suspect your local government is attempting to use its power to promote other private interests, you may be able to stop the government from taking your land. Contact the experienced eminent domain attorneys at the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm for a free evaluation of your case.

"New Urbanism" Puts Murdock Village in a Bind

2008-06-10T13:41:00.000-07:00

In 2002, the Urban Land Institute, a nonprofit research and education organization whose stated purpose is to provide leadership in the responsible use of land for the creation and sustenance of thriving communities, recommended that the Charlotte County, Florida community seek to establish a type of urban center by unplatting small lots into a single large parcel that could support a mixed-use development that might provide stimulus for the stagnant economy of the county.

The county targeted a stagnant development with 2913 empty lots out of 3000, and utilized eminent domain to get land from the last 122 unwilling owners, creating a 1,132-acre block of land which it sought to develop as a single piece. However, a number of developers have dropped out from the project, leaving the area vacant. As the Florida market has followed the nationwide trend of stagnation and decline in the housing market, the development plan's mandate that at least 35 percent of the parcel be residential makes it undesirable to developers, so Murdock village is stuck with $93 million in debt, and no future development in sight.

The only offer still out on the line involves breaking the parcel back up to sell it to a number of smaller developers in "bite size" pieces. However, many in the county question whether this will undermine the new urbanism philosophy and create just another piece of unidentifiable suburban sprawl with no real future.

If your property is being sought for use in redevelopment, one avenue to prevent the taking might be to point out the possible failure of the redevelopment plan. The experienced eminent domain lawyers at the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm know many different tactics for succeeding in your case. Please contact us today for a free initial consultation.

The Self-Defeating Nature of Eminent Domain

2008-05-27T12:03:00.000-07:00

When a city or town announces a plan for redevelopment of an area, the goal is usually to increase economic activity in an area that is either stagnant or "blighted." However, the effect is often the opposite. Once a city announces a plan, people become reluctant to invest in improvements when they are unlikely to receive full compensation for that investment in the event the city actually follows through with an eminent domain taking.

And sometimes it can take years for a condemning authority to make up its mind. Consider the plan by Fresno, California, to build a mixed-use development around its Multipurpose Stadium, a concert venue and home of its AAA baseball team. The project was approved in July 2004, two years after the stadium opened, but the city has still not decided whether to utilize eminent domain to take land for the project. The proposed developer, Forest City Enterprises, is still conducting its site analysis, and has at least one more year to go to complete the process. Forest City has developed numerous commercial, residential, and mixed-use properties from coast to coast, including the Suncoast Lakes development in Pasco County, Florida; redevelopment of the former Stapleton Airport in Denver, Colorado, and University Park at MIT, and has a reputation of being unfriendly to small businesses. The threat of a Forest City redevelopment is keeping locals from investing in the South Stadium area.

Another example is the Murdock Village redevelopment, which is stalled because the city exercised its eminent domain power before finding a developer, and now is struggling to conclude on its plan.

In these circumstances, one wonders whether native redevelopment might not be more effective in providing the desired economic stimulus, rather than utilizing eminent domain in the service of huge developers.

If your property is threatened as part of an urban redevelopment plan, contact an experienced eminent domain attorney the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm today for a free initial consultation.

Keystone Coal Loses Fight to Block Eminent Doman, Seeks Full Compensation

2008-05-01T05:40:00.000-07:00

The Jacksonville Port Authority has the authority to take land owned by Keystone Coal, a judge decided in late 2006. Now the only question is what, exactly, represents full compensation for the plot of land. The 70 acres of land owned by the coal company will be used as part of the development of a 100-acre port, although the exact plan for the port is still undecided.

One plan for the port was to lease the land to Drummond Coal Company, a rival of Keystone, for the purpose of developing a terminal for handling coal and other bulk cargoes. Keystone argued that an eminent domain taking of the land should be blocked because its own plans were at least as economically beneficial as the plan of leasing the land to Drummond. However, an alternate plan for the land was the development of a containerized cargo terminal to be built and administered by Korea-based Hanjin Shipping Company, with the intent of handling cargo originating from Asia. If this plan were followed, it would be the second such port to be built in Jacksonville in the near future, following a 158-acre facility at Dames Point to be built and administered by Japanese carrier Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Limited.

The revelation of other possible uses caused the judge to rule that the eminent domain taking was indeed considered for a valid public use, forcing Keystone to accept the taking and consider only the compensation phase of the trial. Although a judge has ruled in pretrial motions to limit the scope of evidence that Keystone could put before the jury, Keystone hopes to maximize its compensation by comparing its land to that of Zion Jacksonville Limited, which owns the land on Dames Point, for which the Port Authority has offered $40 million, but Zion Jacksonville has asked $70 million.

The valuation trial for the Keystone land is slated for April 21, 2008, after being delayed from May 2007.

If your business is being threatened by eminent domain, there are a number of tactics you can use to either try to stop the taking or to maximize your compensation. To find the best possible strategies, you need an experienced eminent domain lawyer. Please contact the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm today for a free initial consultation.

The Recent Revolution in Eminent Domain

2008-03-31T10:02:00.001-07:00

In 2005, the Supreme Court made what many consider to be an outrageous decision in the case of Kelo v. City of New London. The Court decided that local governments could use eminent domain to transfer private property from one owner to another if this transfer was intended to create economic growth. The Court concluded that this constituted “public use” because the community benefited from the effects of economic growth.

However, many people saw this as an authorization of stealing land from the poor to give it to the rich, and, in response, many states, including Florida, passed laws to explicitly forbid this use of eminent domain. Now, if a municipality wants to take your land, it must prove that the land will be used for a legitimate public use, not just some use which may have a chance of providing trickle-down public good. In order for your land to be passed on to another private owner, both houses of the Florida Legislature must pass a three-fifths majority vote!

So if your land is going to be taken and given to another private owner, you can prevent it from being taken. To learn how you can protect your land from eminent domain, contact Greg Stoner at the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm today for an initial consultation.

Welcome

2008-03-06T20:17:00.000-08:00

Thank you for visiting the blog for the Florida Eminent Domain Law Firm, PA. Check back frequently for news and articles pertaining to eminent domain law throughout the state of Florida.