Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Real Estate & Property Law Blogs -> inversecondemnation
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Real Estate & Property Law
: inversecondemnationWisconsin Supreme Court To Consider Litigation Expenses In Negotiated Condemnation Cases
By Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
According to this report, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has agreed to review Kelmm v. American Transmission Co., No. 2009AP2784 (Aug. 10, 2010) (a court of appeals' decision we noted here). In that case, the court of appeals held that in order to obtain litigation expenses under a state statute which provides that a property owner may recover expenses if a condemnation award exceeds the "jurisdictional offer" by at least $700 and at least 15%, there must be a "jurisdictional offer" made.
Wisconsin eminent domain procedure has a two-fold path, one of which results in a "jurisdictional offer," and the other a negotiated settlement. Either path can end up before the condemnation commission. ATC wanted to place an electricity transmission line across Klemm's land. Rather than fight the taking, the Klemms "agreed to the $7,750 compensation ATC offered in negotiations, with the understanding they had the right to appeal the amount." Slip op. at 1. They did, and the condemnation commissionmission awarded them $10,000. They asked for, and were awarded, litigation expenses pursuant to a statute which provides that litigation expenses shall be awarded if:[t]he award of the condemnation commission under ... [Wis. Stat. §] 32.06(8) exceeds the jurisdictional offer or the highest written offer prior to the jurisdictional offer by at least $700 and at least 15%
Wis. Stat. § 32.28(3)(d).
The trial court concluded that "because either route leads to a commission hearing," if the property owner is successful in obtaining more compensation from the commission even though no jurisdictional offer was made, "the phrase 'the highest written offer prior to the jurisdictional offer' does not require that a jurisdictional offer actually be made." Slip op. at 5.
The court of appeals reversed, concluding the statute's requirement of a "jurisdictional offer" means just that: a jurisdictional offer must be made, and if the path chosen does not include such, the property owners are not entitled to litigation expenses.
The Klemms sought Supreme Court review and on January 28, 2011, the court agreed to take the case. The court's docket entry is here. We'll follow the case and post the briefs as they become available.
Full post as published by inversecondemnation on February 02, 2011 (boomark / email).
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Mesothelioma Law Suit
Asbestos Exposure
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
$189 Million Settlement Reached in Slab Litigation
$189 Million Settlement Reached in Slab Litigation
Breakthrough Settlement Reached In Chinese Drywall Litigation
Chinese Drywall Litigation Breakthrough Settlement Reached
Salmonella Found in Tomotoes
57 Reported Cases in New Mexico and Texas
ConAgra Peanut Butter
Hundreds of Salmonella Cases Settled
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation

New Jersey Supreme Court Sides With Property Owner in Dispute Over Legal Fees in Eminent Domain Case
Recovering litigation costs when condemnation is abandoned
NJ Supreme Court: Property owners get counsel fees on abandonment of condemnation
Wisconsin Supreme Court Reprimands One of Its Own
Wisconsin is Not for Dead Lovers: Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules as Necrophilia is a Crime









