If you are an eminent domain junkie like us, then you will appreciate knowing that the City of Perris v. Stamper case (S213468) will be heard by the California Supreme Court on May 5, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. in San Francisco. As a quick refresher, this is yet another case where the Court is trying to delineate the role of the judge versus the jury in eminent domain cases. The case considers the constitutionality of a dedication requirement imposed by the City of Perris. The Court will be addressing two questions:
-
Is the constitutionality of an otherwise reasonably probable dedication requirement that a governmental entity claims it would have required in order to grant the property owner permission to put his or her property to a higher use a question that must be resolved by a jury pursuant to article I, section 19 of the California Constitution?
-
Was the dedication requirement claimed by the City of Perris a “project effect” that the eminent domain law requires to be ignored in determining just compensation?
(If you’d like a more detailed discussion, you can review our original post from August 2013.)
The Court typically issues a decision within 90 days of oral arguments, so in addition to getting a decision on the Property Reserve v. Superior Court case (which is being heard on May 3), we should have the answers to the above-questions as well. This should be a very interesting summer!
