Here are the Questions Presented in Bay Point Properties, Inc. v. Mississippi Transportation Commission, No. 16-1077 (cert. petition filed Mar. 3, 2017), a case which seeks Supreme Court review of a decision by the Mississippi Supreme Court. We represent the Petitioner.
The full set of party and amici briefs are posted below.An inverse condemnation jury determined the Mississippi Transportation Commission (MTC) ceased using a highway-purpose easement granted to it in 1952 by Petitioner’s predecessor-in-title for a specific bridge, “Toll Project No. 1,” the U.S. Highway 90 crossing of Bay St. Louis. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina destroyed the bridge. MTC removed Toll Project No. 1 and built an entirely new bridge in a different location, and converted the majority of Petitioner’s land into a public recreational park. This discontinued the specific use authorized by the easement, and Petitioner should have immediately recovered unencumbered possession. The jury determined MTC’s new uses were not highway purposes within the 1952 easement, and MTC had taken Petitioner’s property. The court, however, instructed the jury to calculate compensation as if Petitioner’s land was still encumbered by the 1952 highway-purpose easement. A Mississippi statute gives MTC the absolute discretion to formally abandon highway-purpose easements. Because MTC had not done so, the jury only awarded a nominal $500, and not $16 million—the value of the unencumbered land. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed, conflicting with the Federal Circuit and the Court of Federal Claims.This petition presents two questions:
1. Does the Just Compensation Clause prohibit a legislature from limiting how just compensation for a taking is calculated?2. Does the Just Compensation Clause allow the jury to value the fee interest taken as if it were still encumbered by the discontinued highway easement?Here are all the briefs in the case:
- Bay Point's cert petition
- Brief in Opposition (MTC and Mississippi DOT)
- Bay Point's Reply Brief
- Amicus brief of Pacific Legal Foundation
- Amici Brief of Virginia Institute for Public Policy and Owners' Counsel of America
- Amici Brief of Cato Institute, the NFIB Small Business Legal Center, Reason Foundation, Southwest Legal Foundation, NARPO (the National Association of Reversionary Property Owners), the Property Rights Foundation of America, and Professor James Ely (property and easement expert), Shelley Ross Saxer (land use and takings), and Ilya Somin (eminent domain, among other subjects).
Here's a rundown of the commentary on the case:
- Cato Institute Legal Briefs: Bay Point Properties v. Mississippi Transportation Commission: "Unfortunately, governments often do everything they can to get around the Fifth Amendment’s requirements, as the Mississippi Transportation Commission did when it tried to redefine the nature of Bay Point Properties’ land so as to make it effectively valueless for just compensation purposes."
- Pacific Legal Foundation Liberty Blog - State legislatures do not define what constitutes "just compensation": "The Just Compensation Clause protects against this type of abuse, but courts must make sure not to defer to legislature’s calculations of just compensation. Hopefully the Supreme Court will review Bay Point’s case in order to reaffirm that the power of eminent domain is not unlimited, and to ensure the proper constitutional protections for all property owners."
- NFIB blog - The Latest in the Fight Against Eminent Domain Abuse: "Accordingly, we’ve joined in calling upon the U.S. Supreme Court to take this case, to make clear that state government’s may not evade their obligation to pay fair market value. Under no circumstance may a State take property and short-change the owner simply by passing a statute dictating to courts what should be deemed 'just compensation.'"
- Federal Takings blog - "Applied here, the right to trial by jury “means the jury, not the Mississippi legislature or Highway Commission, determines the value of that property Mississippi took from Bay Point."
