Final Brief In Virginia Supreme Court Eminent Domain Case: DOT's Precondemnation Statement Of Value Is Admissible

Here's the property owners' Reply Brief in Ramsey v. Commissioner of Highways, a case currently pending before the Virginia Supreme Court. 

This is the case about Virginia's statutory requirements in eminent domain cases. As 

a prerequisite to a court exercising jurisdiction over a condemnation complaint, a state condemning agency must as an initial step present a statement of "the amount which [the condemnor] believes to be just compensation," to the property owner, and must include an appraisal if an appraisal is required. 

The trial court viewed the required "statement" as a settlement offer, and prohibited the property owner from both telling the jury about the statement, and cross-examining the state's appraiser about it. Even though the state's initial statement of just compensation was $246,292, and later, its new appraiser at trial testified that just compensation was only $92,127. 

Disclosure: we filed an amicus brief in support of the property owners. 

The brief responds to the DOT's brief. The property owners' opening brief is posted here.

More, as the appeal progresses. 

Reply Brief of Appellants, Ramsey v. Commissioner of Highways, No. 140929 (Jan. 5, 2015)

Related articles

A "Savage Appraisal" Indeed: DOT Argues That Its Statement Of Valuation Is A Confidential Settlement Offer

Amicus Brief: Eminent Domain Jury Can't Be Kept In The Dark About The Condemnor's Initial Valuation

Ill App: First Condemnation Was Not Res Judicata To Second

Must An Inverse Condemnation Plaintiff Name All Parties With An Interest In The Property?