Here's the recording of this morning's oral arguments in an important eminent domain case being considered by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. (We had some trouble with the stream, so if the above video doesn't work, try this link instead.)
This is a case we've been following (court of appeals' opinion in favor of the property owner here), in which the issue is whether Wisconsin’s eminent domain statute -- which requires that a condemnor's "jurisdictional offer" be "based" upon a "full narrative appraisal" of "all property proposed to be acquired" -- allows the Wisconsin DOT to provide an appraisal that omits severance, and then later introduce a new appraisal that includes severance. See Wis. Stat. §§ 32.05(3)(e), 32.05(2)(a)-(b). The property owner successfully argued that allowing the DOT to do this skirts the text of the statute, and its purpose. The jurisdictional offer's primary function is to inform the property owner of the just compensation the condemnor believes it must provide -- and more importantly -- why the condemnor believes the amount is accurate and how it reached that conclusion. The statutory requirements and the condemnor’s corresponding obligations are designed to allow a property owner to make a fully informed decision on whether to accept or reject the offer, before becoming enmeshed in a costly and time consuming condemnation lawsuit.
Watch and see what you think. It's hard to say which way the court is going to go with this one, although there were sharp questions posed by the court (particularly by the Chief Justice directed to the DOT's advocate).
Stay tuned, we shall bring you the decision when issued.
