Eminent Domain & Inverse Condemnation

Decades of Experience Specializing in Acquisition of Property for Critical Public Infrastructure Projects Throughout California

Since 1986, Meyers Nave has acquired property on behalf of state, regional, and local public entities for a wide array of public uses, including state highway projects; regional airport projects; regional rail projects (commuter, heavy, and light rail); regional and local bus transit facilities; regional reservoir and water pipeline projects; regional and local flood control projects; regional and local sports arenas and facilities; local transit-oriented development projects; local street and roadway projects; local grade-separation projects; local redevelopment and affordable housing projects; local parks; local hospital expansion projects; local university and school facilities; local fire stations and police stations; local conference centers; and local libraries.

Single-Parcel and Multi-Parcel Acquisitions

We have extensive experience representing public entities in both “single-parcel” acquisitions and “multi-parcel” acquisitions (where a public entity needs to acquire property interests from numerous separate parcels for a public project). We routinely work with our public entity clients’ legal counsel, project management teams, and expert consultants (appraisers, engineers, environmental consultants, land use consultants, right-of-way/relocation consultants, etc.) to coordinate on all legal and practical considerations arising out of large, multi-parcel acquisitions.

All Types of Property Interests

We have acquired a diverse range of property interests needed by public entities for public projects, including fee interests for “full takes” and “part takes”; leased fee interests and leasehold interests; permanent surface easements (both exclusive and non-exclusive); permanent subsurface easements (e.g., subway tunnel easements and subsurface pipeline easements); permanent aerial easements; and temporary construction easements (whether short-term or long-term).

All Types of Properties

We have acquired property interests from all types of properties, including urban, semi-urban, rural, agricultural, recreation/open space, and environmentally sensitive properties. This includes improved properties (improved with buildings and related improvements for industrial/warehouse/R&D, commercial/retail/office, and residential uses); properties with under-utilized improvements that do not contribute to the value of the land and do not reflect the current highest and best use of the property; crop-producing properties; properties with mineral rights; raw land; unimproved properties; open space and park property; special use properties; and public property (property owned by another public entity, public utility, and/or investor-owned utility).

Prejudgment Possession and Critical Path Goals

We have a vast and proven track record of working closely and collaboratively with our public entity clients to meet their project timing and construction goals. This includes significant planning and coordination to prepare and file motions for prejudgment possession, which request an order from the court that our public entity clients may take prejudgment possession of the property to commence construction or related activities prior to resolution of the issue of “just compensation” with the landowner, tenant, or business owner. We have deep knowledge of, and experience with, the Eminent Domain Law’s statutory standards, procedures, and timing for obtaining orders for prejudgment possession.

Complex Valuation Disputes and Unparalleled Trial Experience

Of course, the just compensation to be paid to a landowner, tenant, and/or business owner is a significant part of an eminent domain case. We commonly address complex valuation methodologies used by supporting and opposing expert appraisers. This includes valuation disputes relating to full takes; part takes (and assessing severance damages and benefits); leased fee and leasehold valuation and allocation; improvements pertaining to the realty (“IPTR”); easement valuation; business goodwill and relocation benefits; claims for precondemnation damages; and more. We have an in-depth understanding of the plethora of valuation disputes that can arise, and we have practical and efficient strategies for resolving them.

It should always be the goal of a public entity to successfully negotiate a just and fair settlement with a landowner, tenant, and/or business owner. But there are occasions when the parties are not able to agree on value. In such cases, the issue of just compensation is resolved in court by a jury. Meyers Nave has an outstanding record of successful eminent domain jury trials on behalf of public entities.

Inverse Condemnation

We are experts in both eminent domain (where public entities acquire property for a public use and pay just compensation) and inverse condemnation (where landowners claim that public entities have taken or damaged their property but have not acknowledged their obligation to pay just compensation). Inverse condemnation may include a claim for physical damage to property. It may also include a claim that a government regulation has decreased the value of property (i.e., an alleged regulatory taking). And in eminent domain cases, it may include a claim that a public entity’s precondemnation delay or conduct has decreased the value of property. We have extensive experience in all types of inverse condemnation claims against public entities.

Defending Against Wildfire, Flood, and Landslide-Related Claims

Property owners in California have experienced property damage with increased frequency in the last few years as a result of wildfires, heavy rains and flooding, and/or landslides. As a result, various public entities in California are at risk of being sued for inverse condemnation based upon allegations that public infrastructure has failed to prevent such damage. Meyers Nave’s Eminent Domain & Inverse Condemnation and Trial & Litigation teams represent many public entities in California in defending against such claims.

For a list of trials, see David Skinner’s bio.