Seattle Eminent Domain Lawyer | Eminent Domain Jury Trial

All attorneys, no matter if you represent landowners in an eminent domain case or the condemning authority (Washington Department of Transportation, Sound Transit, Puget Sound Energy, Seattle Department of Transportation, King County Department of Transportation, etc.) feel like if they are taking a case to trial they have a fairly good shot of receiving a favorable verdict. The truth is, however, that often the chances are closer to fifty fifty, and it is impossible to tell what a jury will focus on in your specific eminent domain trial. Often the margin between a successful verdict and an unsuccessful one is razor thin.

For example, in South Dakota, a recent jury trial in an eminent domain action for land for an airport resulted, in essence, in a victory for the county. From the story, found here, it looks as though there was a legitimate difference of opinion in the value of the land. The County was at about $5,000 an acre, and the landowner was at about $8,000 an acre. In the end, the jury decided the County's determination of value was closer to correct, returning a verdict very close to what the County offered as value.

As an aside, in a case like this, with only $3,000 in difference between the parties, no matter what the amount of acreage (in this case it was 200 acres, making a difference of about $600,000 in price) I can't believe a settlement wasn't reached. Although a trial doesn't cost $600,000, generally it is expected that the jury will come somewhere in the middle of the parties. One side must have been fairly confident in their expert appraiser to take this to trial. In this case I hope it was the County.

In any event, as always, it is important to have a good eminent domain attorney, and because we are in the Seattle area, a good Seattle eminent domain attorney. Not only can it make a difference at trial, but they will have the knowledge and experience to know when it is time to go to trial, and sometimes, more importantly, when it is time to settle and take as much as you can get over the offer.

Eminent Domain for Private Use | A Jury Fights Back

Eminent Domain can be used for many things. Most of the time it is used for actual needs of the local, state, or federal government. Such public uses include sewers, government buildings (warehouses, maintenance buildings, courthouses, schools, etc.), roads, electric lines, gas lines, wildlife refuges. But the Supreme Court in a relatively recent court decision determined that public use included taking property for economic development purposes, which often means leasing acquired ground out to private developers who turn it into business parks, malls, speedways, water parks, and any other thing that will make money.

When that case was decided, many states immediately changed their laws to diminish the chances that private land would be taken for economic development purposes (this does not mean that "blighted" land cannot be taken by government entities - there is a time and place for razing old buildings). Some place still allow it, although they are feeling the consequences of trying to take property for what appears to the public to be a private use.

A perfect example of this is in Jacksonville Florida, where a man recently had eminent domain exercised against him so the local governing authority could turn the land over for private development. Tom Scholl bought some ocean front property several years ago for 8 million dollars to use for a coal and cargo business. Shortly after that, Jaxport decided they would condemn the ground to lease it to private developers. They offered Scholl his 8 million dollars and he declined.

Eminent domain proceedings ensued and a jury returned a verdict of 67 million dollars for just compensation to Mr. Scholl. As would be expected, Jaxport is outraged by this and has threatened to ask for a new trial.

What is the moral behind all of this? Don't try to take property via eminent domain for economic development. It is open season for the landowner's eminent domain attorney to point out again and again, especially in this case, that the current property owner wants to use the land for the exact purpose the city wants to use it for, only the city doesn't get the money when they don't own the property. It makes the city look like a bully, and it really fattens the wallet of the property owner.

Was the property worth 67 million? Probably not. But that is the chance you take as a governing body against a landowner with an experience eminent domain attorney. You take the chance of being burned.

Eminent Domain