This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Property
Eminent Domain
Road Widening

State Route 4 Bypass Authority v. Irwin Brent Pomeroy, Melvin Kysh

Published: Jul. 14, 2007 | Result Date: Feb. 2, 2007 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CIVMSC05-01025 Verdict –  $214,610

Court

Contra Costa Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Leslie A. Hausrath


Defendant

Scott E. Jenny


Experts

Plaintiff

Dean Chapman
(technical)

Defendant

Janet Caprile
(technical)

Joseph McNeil
(technical)

Paul M. Stansky
(technical)

Facts

In an effort to widen Marsh Creek Road, the State Route 4 Bypass Authority (Authority) offered $22,560 to Irwin Brent Pomeroy's U-Pick Cherry Orchard, in Contra Costa County, for a 10,656 square foot piece of land out of a 20 acre parcel. Pomeroy turned down the Authority's offer, so the Authority brought an eminent domain action against Pomeroy to determine an appropriate amount of compensation for the land.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The Authority argued the offer was fair given the size of the parcel the Authority was claiming and the small impact it would have on the property. In addition, plaintiff argued Pomeroy need not cut down any cherry trees because his clients could easily continue to park their vehicles along the shoulder of the road, on the property itself and within the public right of way. Plaintiff had appraiser Dean Chapman testify that the square foot value of the land and the walnut trees were lower than Pomeroy asserted. Finally, the Authority claimed Pomeroy would not lose any Transferable Agriculture Credits if they acquired the land in question.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Pomeroy argued against the appraising factors the Authority used to calculate its offer because it failed to include several important economical issues. First, defendant argued the property was worth more than $36,000. In addition, it was argued that the area the Authority wished to assume contained 15 valuable walnut trees that were over 100 years-old and served as a picnic and parking area. Pomeroy argued the loss of these trees and area would be about $60,000 and force Pomeroy to chop down two rows of cherry trees to relocate the picnic and parking areas. This value of losing the cherry trees was estimated at $174,000. It was also argued that the loss of the land to the Authority would force Pomeroy to lose $45,000 in Transferable Agriculture Credits.

Settlement Discussions

The Authority offered a $45,000 payment to Pomeroy, but he demanded $150,000.

Result

The jury awarded Pomeroy a total of $214,610, consisting of fair market value of the lost property at $141,704 and severance damages in the amount of $72,906.

Deliberation

four hours

Poll

11-1

Length

five days


#107547

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390