Private Developer Uses Eminent Domain to Take the Land of Long Time Residents

Traditionally, eminent domain and condemnation constituted a government entity taking a private landowner’s property for public use.  And in turn, the government would offer the private landowner just compensation for its taking.  Unfortunately, courts have stretched this idea until it has reached an almost unrecognizable form.  For example, in a landmark case involving the town of New London, Connecticut, the United States Supreme Court held that the government could take property from landowners in a middle-class neighborhood and give it to a developer.  In making its decision, the Court noted that the government has the potentiality to exercise its power of eminent domain if a property is considered “blighted” or an eyesore in an area.

With such case law presently arising all around the country, it is no wonder that landowners in Brooklyn, New York face an eminent domain crisis of their own.  The state of New York is currently attempting to take privately-held property in the historic Prospect Heights neighborhood and transfer it to developer Bruce Ratner under the guise that the area is “blighted.”  Subsequently, Ratner wants to pump millions of dollars into his so-called Atlantic Yards project in order to build a basketball arena, high-rise residences, and commercial buildings.  Sounds nice… except for those homeowners who have pumped thousands, sometimes millions of their own dollars into the properties, and who do not possess Ratner’s political connections.

So far in the litigation proceedings, Ratner has retained the upper-hand.  New York’s highest court held in November that New York had properly exercised its power of eminent domain.  Those who are opposed to the government’s, more properly Ratner’s, seizure of property in Prospect Heights have vowed to continue fighting, even though an up-hill battle.

If you have an eminent domain or condemnation question or issue please give the attorneys at Sever Storey a call at 888-318-3761 or visit us on the web at www.severstorey.com.

Author Phil Sever
Posted in Eminent Domain & Condemnation
Tags condemnation, eminent domain, kehlo, Sever Storey

In the landmark case of Kehlo v. New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that governments could take land from citizen landowners so that private entities (in this case the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer) could develop on the taken land. Before this ruling, the power of eminent domain was generally believed to be restricted to takings for public uses such as roadways or utility easements. In a reversal of these general beliefs, the Supreme Court held that the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution allowed private land to be taken for development where the community enjoyed a general economic benefit. In explaining this ruling the Court stated that redevelopment plans that created a general economic benefit could be considered a permissible “public use” under the constitution.

This decision was very controversial. Here the Supreme Court was essentially allowing a for profit corporation to take property from private citizens! To this date it still boggles my mind that this could have happened in the United States. It’s bad enough when the state or local governments want to build a highway through your backyard but to allow Pfizer to do the same? The good news is that in reaction to this decision 43 states (including Indiana and Ohio)passed legislation to severely limit the powers granted to private entities under this ruling.

In an interesting twist on the original Kehlo decision, Pfizer has has decided to close its facility on the land that was once taken from landowners. In essence this means that the “economic benefits” initially cited by the Supreme Court will be either severely limited or dissipate altogether.

A discussion by a variety of experts on this occurrence and its general effects can be found here:

To my eyes it proves the foolishness of the original decision. To tie the immense power of eminent domain to nebulous future “economic benefits” is wrongheaded. Of course businesses fail. They fail all of the time. Just because a plan for “prosperity” is written doesn’t always make it true. It seems to me that you should have something more substantial than a good PowerPoint presentation talking about “economic benefits” before you are allowed to take a landowners property. If you feel you are a victim of a local or state government taking your land for a large business development plan, contact one of our Indiana Eminent Domain lawyers today.

Phil

Author Phil Sever
Posted in Eminent Domain & Condemnation
Tags eminent domain, kehlo, take my land