Here’s a quick one from the Indiana Court of Appeals, about when a party must object to an appraiser’s report, and the reaction to that objection by the condemnor.
In Clark County Bd of Aviation Commissioners v. Dreyer, No. 10A01-1206-PL-288 (Mar. 21, 2013), the property owner did not object to the report of three court-appointed appraisers valuing its property at $201,000 within the 21 days allowed under Indiana eminent domain procedures, but the condemor did not object, so the trial went forward. The jury awarded $865,000 as compensation, and the court awarded the owner $24,000 in attorney fees.
The condemnor appealed, arguing that the trial court should not have admitted evidence of the highest and best use of the property that the condemnor alleged was inconsistent with the property’s current use. The Court of Appeals rejected the argument and even though it noted that the property owner had not objected within the required 21 days, it affirmed.
Later, the condemnor asked the trial court for relief from the judgment (it had no funds to pay the amounts in excess of its original $200k estimate), and alleged that the court lacked jurisdiction because the owner had not timely objected. Thus, the trial and appellate judgement were void ab initio. The trial court rejected those arguments, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
The court held that the condemnor’s argument “conflated” legal error with jurisdiction, as jurisdiction only goes to whether a court has power “over the general class of actions to which a particular case belongs.” Slip op. at 9. The court concluded that the owner’s failure to adhere to the 21 day objection period was “at most, a failure to follow statutory procedure as opposed to a real jurisdictional problem.” Id. at 11. Because it was not a “real” jurisdictional problem that went to the power of the court to hear the issues, it was waiveable and could not be collaterally attacked after judgment. The condemnor failed to object, and the court held that this was fatal to its argument.
There are lessons here for both parties, no?