The Utah Supreme Court, on October 18, 2011, issued one of its most important eminent domain decisions in years. The case is entitled Utah Department of Transportation v. Admiral Beverage Corporation, 2011 UT 62 . This decision has a significant impact on the amount of just compensation that must be paid to private property owners for the condemnation of property in certain circumstances. Moreover, the case partially overturns prior Utah Supreme Court precedent decided just a few years earlier, Ivers v. Utah Department of Transporation, 2001 UT 19, 154 P.3d 802.
In Admiral Beverage, the Utah Department of Transportation constructed an elevated interstate freeway which obstructed the visibility of a business and the view from the business. The property condemned did not abut the freeway, but was west of the frontage road located on the west side of the freeway. The Court of Appeals determined that because the property condemned did not directly abut the new elevated freeway no loss of view damages were permitted, and loss of visibility damages were never permitted under the Utah Supreme Court’s decision in Ivers.
The case was appealed to the Utah Supreme Court, which determined that evidence of loss of visibility damages is permitted. Recognizing that its Ivers case was inconsistent with that determination the Court partially overturned the Ivers decision, concluding that it was unconstitutional.
The Ivers rule, which prevents recovery of severance damages for loss of visibility, directly conflicts with both Utah statute and our well-established precedent. It also contravenes our constitutional requirement to provide “just compensation” to those citizens whose property is taken by the state. We therefore conclude that Ivers was wrongly decided and overrule the part of that decision that prevents a landowner from recovering severance damages based on the fair market value of his property before and after the taking. In so doing, we restore our long-standing precedent allowing recovery for all damages that are caused by a taking. When a portion of a landowner’s property is taken, he is entitled to put on evidence of all factors that impact the market value of his remaining property. Therefore, we reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Id. at 17, (Emphasis added).
Therefore, both private property owners and condemnors should keep in mind this change in the law, and the broader conclusion of the Utah Supreme Court which goes beyond visibility damages and has broad potential application to condemnation cases involving severance damages, (subject to limitations previously established by the Court in prior case authority): “[W]e restore our long-standing precedent allowing recovery for all damages that are caused by a taking. When a portion of a landowner’s property is taken, he is entitled to put on evidence of all factors that impact the market value of his remaining property.”
The post Visibility Damages Are Recoverable in a Condemnation Action, Says Utah Court appeared first on Eminent Domain Review.