How Can We Help You? Dedicated To Representing Property Owners
In Eminent Domain
Toll Free:  877 367 6963

Dedicated To Representing Property Owners In Eminent Domain

877 367 6963 Menu
Jeremy P. Hopkins

Jeremy P. Hopkins


Waldo & Lyle, PC
301 Freemason Street
Norfolk, VA 23510
Tel:(757) 622-5812 | Fax:(757) 622-5815 |

A partner with the Norfolk-based law firm of Waldo & Lyle, P.C., Jeremy Hopkins dedicates his practice exclusively to the representation of property owners in cases involving eminent domain, inverse condemnation and other constitutional issues impacting property rights throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. He has successfully litigated and argued before the Supreme Court of Virginia and in state and federal trial and appellate courts across the Commonwealth.  Mr. Hopkins represents property owners against local, state, and federal governments, as well as their many agencies, railroad corporations, utility corporations, such as natural gas pipeline and power line companies, and other entities with the power of eminent domain. He represents property owners from all walks of life and of all kinds, including farmers, homeowners, developers, churches and other religious organizations, social and civic organizations, condominium or homeowners’ associations, small businesses, and Fortune 500 companies.

In addition to representing property owners in condemnation litigation, Mr. Hopkins has fought to protect and advance private property rights in Virginia’s legislature. He has worked with elected representatives and citizen groups to advance legislative changes to protect the rights of property owners in the Commonwealth of Virginia. He has participated in study groups and commissions established by Virginia’s General Assembly to examine Virginia’s eminent domain laws. Mr. Hopkins was influential in the passage of Virginia’s 2012 Constitutional Amendment limiting the use and abuse of eminent domain and strengthening Virginian’s right to just compensation.

Mr. Hopkins has also sought to advance property rights through public awareness. He has published several articles, some of which have been cited by courts throughout the country, held eminent domain seminars throughout Virginia, appeared on local and national television and radio programs, and spoken at events throughout the country in defense of property owners and their constitutional rights. He has been a faculty member for the American Law Institute-American Bar Association, CLE International, and the American Law Institute-Continuing Legal Education in which he taught continuing legal education courses on eminent domain and property rights.

Jeremy Hopkins believes in the importance of private property rights in preserving individual liberty and limited government. Neither he nor his firm have ever represented an entity attempting to take the property of another, and he is proud to say that he has never been in the courtroom when he did not believe in his client, his case, and the cause that they represent. He considers it an honor to represent private property owners, a privilege to practice law, and hopes to continue doing so for many years to come. He is always willing to speak with anyone seeking to defend their private property, to protect their constitutional rights, or to obtain the just compensation guaranteed by the Constitution.

Speaking Engagements

  • CLE International, “Problems in the Certificate,” May 2015, Irvington, Virginia.
  • American Law Institute: Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, “Pipelines and Immediate Possession: The Looming Circuit Split Controversy,” February 2015, San Francisco, California.
  • CLE International, “The Unbuilt Road: Compliance with 25.1-206 and Changing Design Plans,” May 2014, Irvington, Virginia.
  • American Law Institute: Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, “FOIA: How to Effectively Use the Act in Eminent Domain Proceedings,” January 2014, New Orleans, Louisiana.
  • American Law Institute: Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, “Virginia’s Constitutional Reform of Property Rights: Access, Business Losses, and Jury Issues; How it Came About; Pros and Cons,” January 2014, New Orleans, Louisiana.
  • CLE Interntational, “Linear Projects: Utility Corridors,” April 2013, Irvington, Virginia.
  • American Law Institute: Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, “Pipeline Project and Other Utility Corridor Projects,” January 2013, Miami Beach, Florida.
  • American Law Institute: Condemnation 101, “Initial Discovery: Having a Plan and Purpose,” January 2013, Miami Beach, Florida.
  • CLE International, “Article 1, Section 11: Balancing the Requirements of Just Compensation,” April 2011, Richmond, Virginia.
  • American Law Institute: Eminent Domain and Land Valuation Litigation, “Rethinking Concepts Chiseled in Stone: Immediate Possession, Due Process, and Non-compensable Damages,” February 2011, Coral Gables, Florida.


  • “An Analysis of the Judicial Grant of the Quick Take Power,” American Law Institute-Continuing Legal Education, February 2015
  • “Obtaining Eminent Domain Reform: A View Through the Lens of Virginia’s Constitutional Amendment,” American Law Institute-Continuing Legal Education, January 2014
  • “Practical Issues in Freedom of Information and Open Access Litigation,” American Law Institute-Continuing Legal Education, January 2014
  • “Virginia Eminent Domain: Frequently Asked Questions,” Landowner’s Guide to Pipelines, Pipeline Safety Trust, April 2014
  • “Design Build, Due Process, and Descriptions,” CLE International, May 2014
  • “Utility Corridors,” CLE International, April 2013
  • “Initial Discovery in Eminent Domain Proceedings: Having a Plan and a Purpose,” American Law Institute-Continuing Legal Education, January 2013
  • “The Keystone Pipeline,” American Law Institute-Continuing Legal Education, January 2013
  • Virginia Chapter, Fifty State Survey: The Law of Eminent Domain, published for the American Bar Association, Section of Litigation, Committee on Condemnation, Zoning and Land Use, First Chair Press, 1st Ed. (William G. Blake, Editor) (2012).
  • “The Property Rights Constitutional Amendment of 2012,” The Fee Simple, Vol. XXXIII, No. 1, Spring 2012
  • “Debunking Property Rights Amendment Fears,” Washington Times, January 20, 2012
  • “Doctrines of Undercompensation: ‘Just Compensation’ v. just ‘Compensation’,” CLE International, April 2011
  • “Rethinking Concepts ‘Chiseled in Stone’,” American Law Institute-American Bar Association, February 2011
  • “Al-Qaida, the Klan, and Property Activists?,” Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star, January 20, 2011
  • “Basics of Section 1983 Claims,” CLE International, April 2010
  • “The Constitution and the Eminent Domain Attorney,” CLE International, April 2007
  • “Reform Eminent Domain,” Washington Times, January 15, 2007
  • “Not Mr. Jefferson’s Virginia,” Virginia Institute for Public Policy, January 2007
  • The Real Story of Eminent Domain in Virginia The Rise, Fall, and Undetermined Future of Private Property Rights in the Commonwealth,” Virginia Institute for Public Policy, December 2006
  • “Just Compensation: Elementary Principles and Considerations to Ensure the Property Owner Is Made Whole,” American Law Institute-American Bar Association, January 2006. Cited by the Kansas Supreme Court in City of Mission Hills v. Sexton, 284 Kan. 414, 426, 160 P.3d 812, 823 (Kan. 2007).
  • Virginia’s response to Kelo: Constitutional Amendment or Legislation?,” September 2005
  • “Separation of Powers: A Forgotten Protection in the Context of Eminent Domain,” Regent University Law Review, 16 Regent U. L. Rev. 371, 2003/2004.  Cited by the United States District Court in Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC v. 9.32 Acres, 544 F. Supp. 2d 939 (D. Ariz. 2008).
  • “The Claim of Severance Damages in Easement Takings,” American Bar Association-American Law Institute, January 2004
  • “Compensable Nuggets of Just Compensation,” American Bar Association-American Law Institute, January 2003

Bar Admissions

  • Virginia
  • Tennessee
  • District of Columbia
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • United States Supreme Court

Professional Affiliations

  • Board of Directors, Tertium Quids, (an issue advocacy group dedicated to the protection and preservation of limited government and private property rights)