'Interest'-ing Takings Decision From The Federal Circuit: Interest Runs From Date Of The Govt Invasion, Not Date Landowner Found Out

A quick one from the Federal Circuit, Otay Mesa Property, L.P. v. United States, No. 13-5122 (Mar. 6, 2015).

This case has already resulted in one Federal Circuit opinion. See our earlier post "Fed Cir On The Difference Between 'Temporary' and 'Permanent' Physical Takings." There, the court remanded back to the Court of Federal Claims for a determination of damages. We can't summarize the issues or the result in this second appeal better than the Federal Circuit: 

On remand, the Court of Federal Claims held (1) that Otay Mesa was entitled to no damages for the taking of an easement over land that could be developed for industrial use (“the development property”); (2) that it was entitled to damages in the amount of $455,520 for the taking of an easement over land that could be used for environmental mitigation purposes (“the mitigation property”); and (3) that interest on the $455,520 damages award should run from August 28, 2008, the date the court found Otay Mesa became aware of the taking as a result of the filing of a stipulation of liability by the government. Otay Mesa Prop., L.P. v. United States, 110 Fed. Cl. 732, 743–47 (2013) (“Otay Mesa II”) (interest on the damages award was initially deemed to run from October 16, 2008, but the date was adjusted following a motion for reconsideration, 111 Fed. Cl. 422, 424 (2013) (“Reconsideration Decision”)).

For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the decision of the Court of Federal Claims denying damages for the taking of an easement over the development property. We also affirm the decision of the court awarding Otay Mesa $455,520 in damages for the taking of an easement over the mitigation property. However, we vacate the decision of the court computing interest on the $455,520 damages award from August 28, 2008. As we explain, Otay Mesa is entitled to interest computed from when sensors were first placed on its property. The dates the Border Patrol first placed sensors on Otay Mesa’s property are set forth in the government’s stipulation of liability. We thus affirm-in-part, vacate-in-part, and remand. On remand, the Court of Federal Claims will determine the amount of interest to which Otay Mesa is entitled on the $455,520 damages award.

Slip op. at 2-4. 

Otay Mesa Property, L.P. v. United States, No. 2013-5122 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2015)

Related articles

Tohono's "Jurisdictional Ambush" And The Tucker Act Shuffle In The Federal Circuit

NJ Court: There's No Substitute For The Eminent Domain Process, Even On The Shore, Even In An "Emergency"

Nevada: That Contract For Future Condemnation Proceeds Isn't Property