Articles Posted in Eminent Domain Law

Underwood-Blog-Images-5-300x300Ejectment is an action brought by a party seeking to recover a possessory interest or claim of title in a piece of real property. Typically, an ejectment action arises when a titleholder to a piece of property has been wrongfully excluded or withheld from the property. Therefore, ejectment applies only to those cases where an individual actually has possessory title to the subject property.

Ejectment is a possessory action used to recover possession of land or a piece of real property to a plaintiff in possession who has been wrongfully ousted from the property by the defendant. (Fuller v. Fuller (1917) 176 Cal. 637, 638, 169 P. 369].) In simpler terms, ejectment allows a party to retake possession of real property that the party was wrongfully removed from.

A claim of ejectment is a common issue in disputes over the real property where the parties are seeking to establish who holds title to or an interest in the subject property. Specifically, under Code of Civil Procedure section 3375, an individual who is entitled to specific real property may recover by a judgment for its possession or an order requiring a defendant to deliver possession of the property. (CCP § 3375.) At Underwood Law Firm, our attorneys are more than familiar with ejectment actions and the requirements needed to prevail on an ejectment claim. 

Underwood-Blog-Images-1-300x300Not all eminent domain proceedings involve the government taking an entire piece of property. If the property is large enough and the government’s project is limited in scope (expanding a road, for instance), then the government can instead opt for a “partial” taking of the property.

Despite this difference, partial takings are nonetheless subject to the requirement of just compensation for property owners. And in addition, property owners may be entitled to special damages if the government project diminishes the fair market value of the rest of the property.

Eminent domain is, however, one of the more difficult fields to navigate in litigation. This is in no small part due to the many evidentiary hurdles in place that make proving the right amount of just compensation a timely and expensive process. At Underwood Law Firm, our attorneys are more than familiar with overcoming these evidentiary roadblocks and are ready to help assist you with your litigation efforts.

Underwood-Blog-Images-4-300x300Eminent Domain proceedings will almost always end with the government taking title to private property after it pays out “just compensation” to a homeowner.

But sometimes, the government begins condemnation proceedings against the backdrop of a large project with encroaching deadlines. In these instances, California law allows the entity to obtain possession of the property early on in the condemnation process, granting the government the ability to begin its work sooner rather than later.

That said, there are numerous requirements that the government must fulfill in order to obtain pre-judgment possession. And even when the government meets its burden, defendant property owners can still oppose early possession by meeting various showings of hardship.

Underwood-Blog-Images-1-2-300x300A pre-condemnation offer is a formal offer based on an appraisal that the government needs to offer a property owner prior to filing a condemnation claim in court. Condemnation is the special word given to eminent domain actions and should not be confused with the condemnation that is associated with those actions taken by the government against properties that pose health risks and other hazards to the public.

The pre-condemnation offer is incredibly important, and the government’s failure to comply with the strict statutory guidelines in place can result in massive expenses during a condemnation hearing. The Underwood Law Firm is familiar with Eminent Domain disputes over property values and is more than capable of assisting you from the appraisal phase to a condemnation trial.

What is Eminent Domain?

Underwood-Blog-Images-300x300A temporary construction easement (TCE) is a specialized form of easement that a public agency frequently uses as part of an eminent domain project when it “seeks to obtain exclusive possession of a portion of the property for a significant, albeit temporary, period of time.” (Property Reserve, Inc. v. Superior Court (2016) 1 Cal.5th 151, 199.) 

This post will seek to address those issues which commonly arrive in connection with TCE’s and how they may affect you. 

What is an Easement?

A lawyer holding her gravel with documents on her desks and beside her is someone holding lots of money.
Yes. But it is a complex affair. Eminent Domain proceedings take on a unique structure with expert testimony as the backbone for the determination of fair market value. Neither side of the litigation has the burden of proof on this issue of just compensation, and unlike the traditional civil court case, the Defendant presents their evidence first. (Code. Civ. Proc. § 1260.210.)

Additionally, judges will often place limits on what a homeowner may testify to and can screen the witness beforehand to ensure that they’ll be employing a valid methodology on the stand. Taken as a whole, the process can be quite daunting to the layperson. This post will therefore look at the common issues and questions which arise regarding testimony in eminent domain.

The Importance of Testimony in Eminent Domain Proceedings

Books stacked on a desk with a lawyer's gravel.Pre-judgment interests are accrued interests on judgment amounts. Eminent domain is when the government “takes” private property for the public’s use and then owes fair and just compensation to the original private property owners. An eminent domain award is the court-ordered judgment amount that is based on the fair market value of the property owed to the private property owner. 

Generally speaking, eminent domain awards must be paid out to the private property owner before a property’s title can be transferred or the government can take physical possession of the property. Read on to understand what both pre-judgment interests are and eminent domain awards contain.

What is a pre-judgment interest?

Image of Gavel, and Constitution for blog image. ​​Can a property owner sue for inverse condemnation when the government refuses to permit development? Underwood Law Firm, P.C.In certain situations, it is possible for a property owner to sue the government for inverse condemnation when the government refuses to permit development and that refusal results in a “taking” under the United States constitution. 

If the city, state, or federal government refuses to permit development, it must take away all or substantially all the reasonable use of the property in order to form the legal basis for an inverse condemnation lawsuit. Then, the basis for inverse condemnation is formed on the basis of the government’s refusal to permit development, and this can be a powerful legal remedy for property owners.

The lack of reasonable use of the property is viewed with consideration of all of the impact on the personal landowner’s land in order to substantiate an inverse condemnation claim against the government. 

A big house facade with a garden on its lawn
Everyone agrees that there is a shortage of affordable housing in California. There are many possible solutions to this problem, one of the solutions was the Legislature’s passage of AB 1486.

What is the purpose of the Surplus Land Act?

Government Code section 54220 sets the stage for the other provisions of the Surplus Land Act.

A lawyer's desk with scales in front and a lawyer's signing a paperwork behind it.
The acquisition of private property for eminent domain usually proceeds on a long timeline. Before the government actually uses eminent domain to acquire private property, there is a substantial amount of planning. During the pre-condemnation period, which can stretch for years, a governmental entity often has the opportunity to make land use decisions about the property that it intends to acquire.

While there is nothing out of the ordinary with making land use decisions pending condemnation, per se, it can become problematic when those decisions lower the value of the land that will eventually be taken. In those situations, there is a question about whether the property owner in that situation can recover from the diminution in value.

Unreasonable Delay is Compensable

Contact Information