Eminent Domain Blog : Pennsylvania Eminent Domain Lawyer & Attorney : Fox Rothschild Law Firm : Condemnation, Real Estate Valuation : Philadelphia, Bucks County, Pennsylvania

Our eminent domain team won a $17.25 million jury verdict for client, Peter Alecxih, in a controversial eminent domain case that has played out in York County, Pennsylvania, over the past four years. The award was $15.25 million higher than the County’s original offer when it seized the land. The award is believed to be one of the highest ever awarded in an eminent domain case in Pennsylvania.

The case involved a 79-acre tract of land known as Highpoint, which was taken in May 2004 by the County for use as a park. Working on behalf of Alecxih, the Fox team, led by Herbert Bass and his team of Fox Rothschild attorneys David Snyder, Marc Needles and Brett Berman, took the case to trial. After presenting the testimony of various witnesses who valued the property between $16 and $17.775 million, the jury returned a verdict in Alecxih’s favor of $17,250,000.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

PennDOT has re-launched its Marshalls Creek Bypass website. The Monroe County, Pennsylvania project’s website was unavailable for at least a few months. It is now up and running again at www.marshallscreekbypass.com/main.cfm. You can find information regarding PennDOT’s intended construction schedule and other topics. However, the site does not shed any new light on the third phase of construction which was temporarily put on hold in the spring. It appears that PennDOT still intends to move forward at some point with phase 3 of the project. However, it is still considering design issues. Stay tuned.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The City Commissioners of Ventnor, New Jersey, have passed a law limiting that City’s ability to condemn properties. On July, 17, 2008, the City Commissioners voted to prohibit Ventnor's use of eminent domain for redevelopment projects that involve private developers. According to press accounts of the meeting, there was overwhelming support for the law and no contrary opinions.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A New Jersey Senate Committee has passed a statute that is designed to deal with alleged eminent domain abuses. This statute has been discussed for two years and is purportedly designed to protect homeowners from developers seeking the land for private development. Senator Ronald Rice, the sponsor, said that the bill would limit the use of eminent domain for redevelopment. It also adds new requirements regarding pre-condemnation negotiations between the condemning authority and the property owner. The bill was passed by the Senate Committee and Urban Affairs Committee and can be found at  www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/S1000/757_I1.HTM.  The bill now moves to consideration by the full Senate.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to revisit its controversial decision in Kelo v. City of New London. In Goldstein v. Pataki, property owners challenged the project in Brooklyn known as the Atlantic Yards Arena and Redevelopment Project. The properties were condemned for a new basketball arena for the New Jersey Nets as well as high rise apartments and office buildings.

The challengers to the project argued that the purpose of the project was improper and raise some of the issues that were raised by the Kelo decision and the response to the Kelo decision. The justices, without comment, refused to hear the argument that the seizure of their property would violate the United States Constitution. Justice Alito, however, noted that he wanted to hear the case.
This was one of the first opportunities for the United States Supreme Court to address many of the issues that were raised by Kelo and its backlash. However, the Supreme Court – which as two new justices since the Kelo decision – decline to consider these issues in this context.

• Email This
• Print

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court recently found that a Borough cannot condemn property owned by a school district. In that case, the Borough of Hanover condemned property owned by the Hanover Public School District. The school district challenged the taking and argued that the Borough could not condemn property owned by another public entity – as opposed to private property. Rather, the school district argued, the Borough could only private property. The trial court and the Commonwealth Court agreed and found that, because the Pennsylvania Borough Code does not expressly provide for condemnation of public property, there was no authority for the Borough to condemn the school district’s land.

This case points out the need to analyze whether a condemnation is authorized by statute. To do so, it is necessary to review the applicable code – for example the applicable Township Code, County Code or Borough Code – to determine whether there is authorization for the contemplated condemnation.

• Email This
• Print