...allowed to be robbed from their private property by the government! On May 24, the City Council of Dallas discussed item #11 on its agenda. Item #11 involves a case of eminent domain in which the council wants to low-ball an individual landowner out of his property to construct a ‘much needed’ waterline. For years, the owner, Monty Bennett, a wealthy businessman who founded the Ashford Hospitality Trust, has sued the council. He urges the Council to construct said pipeline around his property instead of right through it. Bennett’s family purchased the land in 1955. In order to protect his land, Bennett has constructed a cemetery on his property for under Texas Law 711.035 cemeteries are exempt from "taxation, seizure by creditors and eminent domain."...
Words: 636 - Pages: 3
...In this case, the parties asked the court to focus on the legitimacy of a local government’s exercise of its power of eminent domain. Eminent domain is a power of the government to take land for public use. Under an agreement with the town of Monroe, North Carolina, the town of Midland began to acquire the rights of way to local land for the installation of a natural gas pipeline. Under the agreement, Midland could—if it chose—tap the line at a discounted price. Midland used its eminent domain authority to condemn the property. Fifteen property owners challenged the action in a North Carolina state court. The court ruled in Midland’s favor. The owners appealed, claiming that Midland's condemnation was not for public use or benefit, because the town had no concrete plan to tap the line. Therefore, the main issue was...
Words: 554 - Pages: 3
...Julia Lemon's versus Eminent Domain Devaira Welch Social Studies Mrs. Chidester March11, 2015 Abstract What would you do and how would you feel if someone stole your property and home. In most cases this would be unlawful theft. But the government and big companies uses lawful theft under the eminent domain law. Eminent Domain is a legal way for the government and big companies to steal your property and home. How would you feel if someone stole your property and home? In most cases this would be unlawful theft. But the government uses lawful theft to do just that. Eminent domain also known as the right for the government to take your property and home for the public good, it is the power of the state to snatch a person’s land for public...
Words: 760 - Pages: 4
...Key facts: In case 36, Bruce Carson is designing a road between two large cities in an unspecified state. He determines that the shortest route to construct the road would be through the land and farmhouse of the Jones family. The farm has been in the Jones' family for 150 years. The building the road using the route though the farmhouse would reduce the commute time between cities to one hour forty minutes from a two hour drive. The owner, Robert Jones, is 63 years old and was raised on the farm and has lived in that farm house his whole life. He is not willing to sell the farm for any amount of recompense. However, Bruce thinks that he can have the state acquire the land using "eminent domain". Key concepts: Some of the key concepts of this case are the public's health, safety, and welfare; as well compassion,...
Words: 737 - Pages: 3
...The city of Mobile has grown significantly in the past twenty years. Specifically, in West Mobile. Due to this growth mobile wanted to make wider lanes on some of the longer, most traveled roads. Schillinger’s road was targeted to become a five-lane road. In the process, the city cut back hundreds of homes yards and this was through the use of Eminent Domain. Luckily, the city only had issues with two specific properties but it has been handled in the courts. Eminent Domain is a legal strategy that allows a federal or local government to seize private property for public use. The seizing authority must pay fair market value for the property seized. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution permit the government to exercise its power of eminent domain. It is important to note that those people really didn’t have a choice in their yards being used for roads. From the available information on the Schillinger’s road project, all of the homeowners felt they had gotten just compensation of around $20,000 to $60,000. Only two men felt their property was worth around $120,000 but in court it was finalized at about $60,000 as it was only a corner of their property. The $60,000 is what the lands fair market value is....
Words: 532 - Pages: 3
...When Should Eminent Domain be Used? When should a city or state use their eminent domain powers? Over the past few years there have been a couple of cases that raised the questions of when eminent domain should be used. One of the most controversial cases in the history of the United States was the Kelo v New London Supreme Court ruling. In order to generate tax revenue, add jobs, and to prevent bankruptcy, the government’s right to initiate eminent domain for public good is a necessary evil. Eminent domain in definition is “the right or power of public purposes without the owner’s consent on payment of just compensation” (“Eminent Domain History”). Eminent domain has been a part of the United States ever since the constitution was created. Eminent domain is not stated in the constitution. However, it is implied at the end if the Fifth Amendment, " [no person should] be deprived of life, liberty, or property be taken for public use, without just compensation" (U.S. Constitution). Eminent domain is not new to the United States. The first eminent domain case was “in 1879 the Supreme Court, in the case of Boom Co. v. Patterson, (98 U.S. 403) said that eminent domain appertains to every independent government. It requires no constitutional recognition; it is an attribute of sovereignty" (“Draw the Line”). After World War II, eminent domain was used on a regular basis. "In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Berman v Parker that private projects meet the definition if...
Words: 1214 - Pages: 5
...The primary focus of lawsuits, such as that brought on behalf of WTC workers, and compensation schemes such as workers’ compensation is on paying those who have injured or made ill. The OSH Act created a general duty on the part of every covered employer to maintain a work environment free from “recognized hazards causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employee.” It also created a federal agency, the Occupational safety and Health Administration (OSHA), empowered to oversee safety and health standards, by enforcing the general duty clause and by writing and enforcing detailed health and safety standards for each industry, and the National Institute of Occupational safety and Health(NIOSH), to provide research, information, education, and training. On-the-job risk:1 many dangers, such as falls from roofs or amputations form unguarded machinery.2 forceful exertions, repetitive movements and awkward posture. 3 dactyl and the food flavorings that cause bronchiolitis obliterans or modern metalworking fluid.4 workers compensation: Firms contribute to a workers’ compensation fund that is used to pay benefits to employees accidentally injured in the workplace. Instead of suing ,an employee’s legal task is simplified . she need not prove the company was negligent, nor can the company raise any of traditional defenses to negligence to defeat her claim. Employers are willing to accept this approach because there is a trade-off: if workers compensation covers...
Words: 545 - Pages: 3
...of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, reactivated the New London Development Corporation (NLDC), a non-profit entity for land development in the city, specifically the Fort Trumbull area vacated by the U.S. Navy. Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, Inc. expressed an interest in locating a research and production facility in the area. The city advised the NLDC to move forward with its plans. Over 90 acres of property were purchased and acquired through eminent domain for the development of residential housing, recreational, marina, retail and industrial parcels. Of the 90 acres, thirty-two of the acres came from Fort Trumbull and the remainder from private owners. All private owners, except 15, sold to the city for the project. The remaining 15 held out not for money, but for emotional and sentimental reasons. The Supreme Court of Connecticut ruled in favor of the taking of the private property under eminent domain. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari and grouped all 15 cases in one appeal. IV. LEGAL ISSUES: Is the use of eminent domain to acquire property by the government and redirect for private use repugnant to the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which reads “…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”? Is the taking of property from A and giving it to B for economic development a “public use” under the Fifth Amendment? V. COURT DECISION: In a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Connecticut Supreme...
Words: 1569 - Pages: 7
...ownership right in all land. This right is known as eminent domain. Eminent domain is the power of the government to take private property from a citizen, even when that citizen refuses to voluntarily sell the property. In the United States, use of the eminent domain power is limited by a clause in the Fifth Amendment of the constitution, which states “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”. Long established purposes for the eminent domain power have been for the building of roads and public buildings, but it has become increasingly common for state or local governments to use the power for redevelopment projects. The city of New London, Connecticut established a private development corporation to redevelop a neighborhood near the shore of Long Island Sound with the goal of revitalizing the depressed area. A group of home owners, who lived on the targeted land, including Susette Kelo, decided to fight the issue rather than allow their homes to be destroyed. The Supreme Court case of Kelo v. City of New London established that eminent domain can be used for economic redevelopment projects. The U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling against the homeowners established that the Fifth Amendment's "public use" requirement is merely a "public purpose" requirement. The City of New London only needed to anticipate that the public will benefit in some way in order to justify a given use of eminent domain. New London anticipated that its redevelopment...
Words: 279 - Pages: 2
...legislation will benefit both industry and those whose livelihood is dependent on land. It provides two times more compensation in urban areas and four times more compensation in rural areas than the circle price. The circle rates are decided by the local government on the basis of average sale price for the last 3 years or last 3 months whichever is higher. The bill establishes regulations for land acquisition as a part of India's massive industrialization drive driven by public-private partnership. The bill will be central legislation in India for the rehabilitation and resettlement of families affected by land acquisitions. In addition the bill has a provision by which states can add some more benefits to it. The bill will eclipse the eminent domain criteria and introduce voting criteria in which 80% of the people should say yes only then land will be acquired. The Bill will replace the decade old Land Acquisition Act of 1894, which was enacted during British rule. However there is still some confusion whether the bill is boon or a bane. Many people say it is a boon, others say that it is just a move to increase the vote bank in the forthcoming elections. DISADVANTAGES OF THE BILL The Industry has serious concerns on some of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Bill. 1. The CII say that the cost of land...
Words: 611 - Pages: 3
...that releasing the water in the recommended manner would cause some limited flooding. As a result, Mr. Appleseed’s fruit orchard was flooded and he lost his crop for that year and many trees on his property were permanently destroyed. I will present my argument that this temporary flooding was a taking as defined by our text and was done so under eminent domain. When a property is taken in this manner the owner is justly compensated for the loss according to the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Keywords: eminent domain, taking, temporary flooding The practice of taking by eminent domain is deeply rooted in history long before it was written about in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The term itself was taken from the legal treatise De Jure Belli et Pacis, which was written by Hugo Grotius in 1625. Grotius, whose various texts are considered the foundations for international law, defined the power as follows: The property of subjects is under the eminent domain of the state, so that the state or he who acts for it may use and even alienate and destroy such property, not only in the case of extreme necessity, in which even private persons have a right over the property of others, but for ends of public utility, to which ends those who founded civil society must be supposed to have intended that private ends should give way. But it is to be added...
Words: 1221 - Pages: 5
... | Eminent Domain: Being Abused? July 4, 2004 [pic] |[pic]The City of Lakewood, Ohio was trying to use | | |eminent domain to force Jim and Joanne Saleet out of | | |their house in order to make way for expensive | | |condominiums. (AP) | | |Quote | | |[pic] | | |"For them to come in and tell me how much my | | |property's worth and for me to get out because they're| | |bringing in somebody else when I own the land is | | |unfounded to me.” | | |Shop owner Randy Bailey of Mesa, Ariz. | | |[pic] | | (CBS) Just about everyone knows that under a process called eminent domain, the government can (and does) seize private property for public use - to build a road, a school or a courthouse. But did you know the government can also seize your land for private use if they can prove that doing it will serve what's called "the public good"? Cities across the country have been using eminent domain to force people off their land, so private developers can build more expensive homes and offices that will pay more in property taxes than the buildings they're replacing. Under eminent domain, the government buys your property, paying you what's determined...
Words: 1946 - Pages: 8
...Eminent domain is described as the power of the government to take private property for public use. The “Taking’s Clause” is described in the United States Constitution as “..Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”. In the case of Kelo v. City of New London, Connecticut, the city of New London did not violate the Taking’s Clause. It is stated in the case that the city purchased the property of 15 of the 24 owners. They were taking the property to build a research facility, a hotel and also stores and private residences. These are all for public use. Of course I can see how the homeowners would think that it was more for private use, the city of New London would be making profits from the sale of residential property and also from the building of the businesses. However they are for public use. Since the government had to take the landowners to court the government had to file suit to seek “condemnation” of the land. This is just stating that they are offering a just price for the land and awarding the title to the government. This was the case a few years back in the county I live in. I live in Crawford County, Ohio and the State of Ohio was working to rebuild a public highway. While they were offering large amounts of money to the land owners, a few of them tried to stand strong and not sell. Unfortunately they were forced to sell and then received less than the other landowners. I understand why they didn’t want to...
Words: 393 - Pages: 2
...Student name Institution name Date Introduction Question: Is the policy of eminent domain providing for the public welfare, through the taking of privately owned property, using a rightful procedure involving due process and just compensation as it was intended to do when the policy was founded? Eminent domain is the inherent power of the government to take over a citizen's property for public use without the owner's consent. Initially, this public policy originated in the Middle Ages throughout the world. It became part of the British common law before reaching the United States where it was then illustrated in the US Constitution in 1791 (Britannica: eminent domain). The Fifth Amendment granted the federal government the right to exercise eminent domain, provided protection to individuals, and protected the property rights of citizens. Shortly after the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment made the federal guarantee of “just compensation” applicable to the states. The use of eminent domain power to promote economic development, particularly in urban centers of the United States, has become the focus of significant controversy in this present day. This is commonly done when the acquisition of property is needed for the completion of certain project. Projects intended for the public good such as highways, bridges, schools, and government buildings have been created from Eminent Domain. The policy pertains to every independent government. It requires very little...
Words: 3810 - Pages: 16
...Logan Armbruster September 17, 2014 Business 481 Case 3.1 1. Did New London treat Susette Kelo and her neighbors fairly? Assuming that the proposed development would help to revitalize New London, is it just for the city to appropriate private property around Fort Trumbull? a. I believe that New London treated Kelo and her neighbors as fair as they could. The proposed development would hope to attract new development, which would help revitalize the community and bring in tax revenue. I believe it’s just for the city to appropriate private property around Fort Trumbull because of their power of eminent domain. 2. Are towns such as New London and Salina pursuing wise, beneficial, and progressive social policies, or are their actions socially harmful and biased against ordinary working people and small-business owners? a. I believe that New London and Salina are pursuing progressive social policies but their actions are socially harmful to the homeowners of the areas that they are taking over with their eminent domain right. 3. Do you believe that eminent domain is a morally legitimate right of government? Explain why or why not. a. I believe that eminent domain is a morally legitimate right of government. I feel this way because you are being compensated for your loss of property with either money or land or both. If the area where your home is located is potentially a prime area that could bring in new development and revitalize a community...
Words: 547 - Pages: 3
