Yearly Archives: 2010

According to the 2010 Index of Economic Freedom published by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal, 16 countries rank higher than the United States in protecting private property rights. From the report: “The United States’ economic freedom score is 78.0, making its economy the 8th freest in the 2010 Index. Its score is 2.7 points lower than last year, reflecting notable decreases in financial freedom, monetary freedom, and property rights.”

KMOX.com reports here that just compensation has finally been paid to St. Louis property owner Bill Simon for the 2 acre commercial property he owned in the Bottle District of downtown St. Louis. In 2005, the Land Clearance and Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) seized Mr. Simon’s land by eminent domain for the purpose of redevelopment.

In July 2008, a jury awarded Bill Simon $2,871,200, an increase of approximately $1.6 million over what he had initially been offered. (See our previous post about the case here.) The court entered a judgment against the Land Clearance and Redevelopment Authority (LCRA) requiring the city agency to pay the verdict amount plus $317,427 in pre-trial interest and $475 per day in interest thereafter.

On Tuesday, July 13, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed into law Senate Bill 851 and House Bill 1444, which contain identical provisions that require local governmental bodies to provide at least four days’ public notice before meetings on eminent domain, tax increases or redevelopment plans financed with public funds can take place. Additionally, the new law prohibits voting on such items prior to allowing the public to comment on these items.

During the Senate confirmation hearings held this week, Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan did provide a somewhat direct response to Senator Grassley’s questions concerning her position on property rights. From the exchange between Sen. Grassley and Ms. Kagan:

In a majority opinion authored by Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, the Supreme Court concluded that no compensation can be just compensation.

Last week the New York Court of Appeals issued its decision in Kaur v. New York State Urban Development Corp., No. 125 (June 24, 2010) (see our post here). In it’s decision, NY’s highest court reversed the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (First Department) decision issued December 3, 2009 which had struck down the attempted taking by eminent domain finding that the taking was unconstitutional as the project would not have a true public purpose but rather an entirely private benefit to Columbia University.

The Daily Reporter (Milwaukee, WI) posted an article June 22 by Sean Ryan detailing the VFW eminent domain case refused for review by the U. S. Supreme Court (see our previous post here). Mr. Ryan’s article ‘You can’t fight city hall’: VFW loses eminent domain battle outlines the history of the case – a near decade long battle waged by the VFW Post 2874 against the Milwaukee Redevelopment Authority over just compensation for the Post’s valuable long-term leasehold.

We have just learned that the New York Court of Appeals (the state’s highest court) has released its opinion in the matter of Kaur v. New York State Urban Development Corp., No. 125 (June 24, 2010). This is the case in which the New York State Urban Development Corporation (also known as the Empire State Development Corporation or ESDC) sought to condemn by eminent domain private properties in the West Harlem neighborhood surrounding Columbia University and give those seized properties to that private institution for an expansion project it wishes to undertake.

Yesterday, blogger Karen Dybis posted her interview with eminent domain attorney Alan Ackerman on The Detroit Blog (a Time/CNN partner blog). [Disclosure: Alan Ackerman is the Michigan Member of Owners’ Counsel of America.]