Premium Essay

Eminent Domain

In: Social Issues

Submitted By chimerakittie44
Words 3810
Pages 16
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 constitutional recognition, and is considered an attribute of sovereignty. Under the US constitution, private property may be taken by eminent domain if the taking is for a public purpose and if just compensation is provided (Britannica: property law). Given the intended purpose of Eminent Domain, the policy faces controversy as to whether it is carrying out its mission of providing for...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Eminent Domain

...it would move to Palmdale if it could not expand. Lancaster tried to buy 99 Cents' lease, but the company refused. Lancaster then used its power to emenent domain to condemn the 99 Cents property for the purpose of making city contrasted 99 Cents property for the purpose of making it available to Costco. the city noted that blight might follow if Costco left, and the city contrasted 99Cents' under $40,000 per year in sales taxes generated with costco's more then $400,000. 99 Cents then sued the city seeking an order blocking the effort to take the 99 Cents property Eminent domain allows states the right to take over private property, at fair market value, for public use. Due the declining economy of Lancaster, I would rule in favor of the state to take over 99 Cent Only Stores Property thereby allowing Costco to move in. The additional sales tax generated by allowing Costco to take over the property of 99 Cent Only Store would allow Lancaster to continue independently as a productive county. The present negative of eminent domain, in this case, wieghs far less than the positive outcome of ruling in favor of Costco. B. Would the result be any differnet today after the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in the New London, connecticut case? Explain According the to Supreme Courts ruling, the city can file for eminent domain even if the economy is not blighted. The result would be the same today; however, prior to ruling in favor of the state, I would require Costco's......

Words: 343 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Eminent Domain Paper

...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......

Words: 1214 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

A State’s Right of Taking Under Eminent Domain or Police Powers

...Professor Aragon Real Estate Law – FIR 4310 23 April 2015 Essay Assignment A State’s Right of Taking Under Eminent Domain or Police Powers Johnny Appleseed’s 356 acre fruit orchard was flooded and, as a result, he lost his crop for that year in addition to fruit trees that were damaged beyond repair. The government released water from a damaged dam to prevent it from catastrophically flooding a valley below. The question is was this a taking under the state’s right of eminent domain, therefore requiring compensation, or a taking under the state’s police powers, therefore no compensation is required. In my opinion, the damage to Johnny’s fruit orchard is a taking under the state’s police powers; therefore no compensation is required. A “taking” defines as “to acquire possession or control of something” (Herman). However, the practice of eminent domain do not provide a clear context of taking, thus American courts put it into three categories: per se takings, regulatory takings, and exactions. Johnny’s case could be under the regulatory takings category. “Regulatory takings demand a fact-intensive, multi-factored inquiry into whether the governmental action amounts to an unreasonable interference with one’s private land rights, as to trigger the takings clause” (Herman). But first, I want to define what police powers and eminent domain are. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, police power is “in U.S. constitutional law, the permissible scope of......

Words: 768 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Eminent Domain

...Eminent Domain Under the Fifth Amendment of United States Constitution, the government is provided the power to enforce eminent domain and take private property for public use. This provision allows this provision as long as adequate compensation is being made for the property. Article 1, Section Seventeen under the Texas Constitution prohibits the taking, damaging or destruction of property for public use without adequate compensation. Generally, there are four elements of eminent domain but ultimately the actor must be the state or a private party authorized by the state to condemn the property. The power to condemn must be conferred by the legislature and only upon a two-thirds vote of both houses will it be granted. The primary private parties that are empowered to perform eminent domain are gas or electric corporations, groundwater conservation districts and common carrier pipelines. Once the property has been identified, the Condemner must provide plans for the public project and indicate the exact location of the private land needed for the project. Once this information is acquired, a declaration must be made that certain property rights must be obtained to complete the project and that all property owners involved must be notified. Element one consists of the property taken must be for public use and in 2009, voters approved a constitutional amendment further clarifying public use. To understand the purpose of public use, it is necessary to note it is......

Words: 965 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Eminent Domain

...KINGSFORD CHARCOAL ASSIGNMENT (10 Points) 1. The Kingsford Charcoal case takes place in July 2001. 2. Kingsford’s primary competitor is gas grills. Most people do not want or have the time to spend on getting charcoal ready for grilling; therefore, the concept of convenience, greater control over cooking temperature, shorter cooking times, and ease of clean-up makes the selling points for gas grilling. 3. The two ways for Kingsford to determine variables that segment the market, they are heavy Kingsford users and gas grill users. The “heavy” Kingsford users can be segmented into “Regular Exclusive”, “Instant Acceptor”, and “Instant Exclusive” (Exhibit 9). Gas grillers can be segmented into “own gas only grills” or “owns both”. 4. SWOT Analysis example for Kingsford would looks like: a. Strength: Established brand b. Weakness: Advertising budget c. Opportunity: Number of US grilling events have more than doubled since 1987 d. Threat: Increasing trend of gas grills shipments (Exhibit 5). 5. Use Exhibit #10 and compare the 4 scenarios below: a. The pricing scenario that resulted in the smallest reduction in dollar sales is the “Minimum (2.5%) Blue Bag Pricing Increase” (#2). b. The amount of the smallest decrease in dollar sales is $1,110. c. The pricing scenario that resulted in the greatest increase in profits is the “Total Line pricing (5%) Increase”. d. The amount of the greatest increase in profits is......

Words: 697 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Belaw

...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......

Words: 545 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Land Acquistion

...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

Premium Essay

Case 3

...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, I think that it is only fair that you are relocated for the sake of the community. 4. “If” ‘just compensation’ is paid, then by definition those who lose......

Words: 547 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Kelo vs New London

...Kelo vs City of New London The Kelo vs City of New London case is one that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States with the issue involving eminent domain. Eminent domain is the transfer of property from one private party (Kelo) to a public party (City of New London), with proper compensation. The case brought to light the difference between what is considered to be public use and what is the best public purpose. Susette Kelo and fellow property owners owned property that was condemned by the city of New London to be used as further economic development. The properties were taken from the owners due to the fact a pharmaceutical company named Pfizer Inc, was planning to build a facility in the area which gave the New London Development Corporation the motivation to develop the surrounding area to help increase the current New London economy. The property was to be used as a redevelopment plan which was promised to generate 3,169 new jobs and tax revenues of $1.2 million per year. The court decided in a 5-4 decision that the benefits given to the community outweighed the benefits of Susette Kelo owning the property; the courts determined this as permissible public use under the Fifth Amendment. The City of New London had agreed with Susette Kelo to compensate for moving the Kelo’s house to a new location and substantial additional compensation to other homeowners. The property eventually became an empty lot which was then transferred to a city dump due......

Words: 1437 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Kelo Et Al. V. City of New London Et Al.

...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......

Words: 1569 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Taking

...could suffer a catastrophic flood. The engineers acknowledged 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

Free Essay

Business Damages

...Research Paper April 27, 2001 House Bill No. 197 – Business Damages House Bill 197 is a bill that amends Idaho Code Section 7-711 in regards to business damages in eminent domain or condemnation proceedings. The article, “Valuing Business Goodwill Loss in Eminent Domain Cases” by Robert Trout defines a condemnation as: The process of taking private property for public use through the power of eminent domain (government). Trout states, The loss of property causes economic damages consisting of lost tangible asset values and, when appropriate, lost intangible asset values, primarily business goodwill. Tangible assets are those that show up on a balance sheet, including real property. Examples include land, buildings, and equipment. Intangible assets are other assets of a business that can be individually identified and valued. Examples include trademarks, patents, copyrights, trade secrets, customer lists, and goodwill. (Trout) Business damages are new just last year (2000) to Idaho law. Prior to that there were no laws stating that a condemnor had to pay a condemnee for their business loss due to the acquisition of new property. Being so new, Idaho does not have a definition of goodwill. California does however, and the lawmakers there identify it as: [B]enefits that accrue to a business as a result of its location, reputation for dependability, skill, or quality, and any other circumstances resulting in probable retention of......

Words: 1161 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Laws310

...Question 12 Page 170 On July 5, 1884, four sailors were cast away from their ship in a storm 1,600 miles from the Cape of Good Hope. Their lifeboat contained neither water nor much food. On the 20th day of their ordeal, Dudley and Stevens, without the assistance or agreement of Brooks, cut the throat of the fourth sailor, a 17- or 18-year-old boy. They had not eaten since day 12. Water had been available only occasionally. At the time of the death, the men were probably about 1,000 miles from land. Prior to his death, the boy was lying helplessly in the bottom of the boat. The three surviving sailors ate the boy’s remains for four days, at which point they were rescued by a passing boat. They were in a seriously weakened condition. a. Were Dudley and Stevens guilty of murder? Explain. b. Should Brooks have been charged with a crime for eating the boy’s flesh? Explain. See The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens, 14 Queen’s Bench Division 273 (1884). a. “The facts found on the special verdict shew that the prisoners were not guilty of murder, at the time when they killed Parker but killed him under the pressure of necessity. Necessity will excuse an act which would otherwise be a crime.”(justiceharvard) After reading this I believe that they did what they had to do in order to survive. They said the boy was weak and wouldn’t have made it anyway. They will have to live with the decision they made but they got to live because of it. b. No, he used it as a means to......

Words: 665 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Land Acquisition in India

...LAND ACQUISITION IN INDIA A REPORT SUBMITTED FOR THE COURSE “THE INDIAN ECONOMY” SUBMITTED BY: BISWAPRIYA SAHA DEEPSHIKHA GOVLI HIMANI KABRA ITISHREE DASH MRITYUNJAY BASAK PGP/17/076 PGP/17/077 PGP/17/080 PGP/17/083 PGP/17/094 Page 2 of 13 Table of Content ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 5 BENEFITS OF LAND ACQUISITION ....................................................................................................... 6 NEGATIVE IMPACT ON FARMERS ........................................................................................................ 6 NEGATIVE IMPACT ON TRIBALS .......................................................................................................... 6 NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SOCIETY.......................................................................................................... 6 NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................. 6 CRITICISM OF LAND ACQUISITION POLICY ...................................................................................... 7......

Words: 3341 - Pages: 14

Free Essay

Casestudy 3 - Property

...Contracts Case Study: Property Martha Sparks April 19, 2013 Introduction In this case study, Barney is a client that running into an extreme case of misfortune facing several issues that must be resolved in court. The issues will be outlined below with information to help properly set Barney's expectations of his upcoming battle to keep his possessions. I have grouped the issues based on the calls listed to the attorney in the case study. Issue #1 - mountain property that is currently in process of foreclosing includes a squatter Barney is on his way out to his mountain property to do some fly fishing when he was welcomed by a hostile participant. Barney tried to explain that he had the deed to prove the property belonged to him. The hostile participant responded by saying he had lived on the property for some 20 years and that it belonged to him. According to "North Carolina General Assembly" (2013), "No action for the recovery or possession of real property, or the issues and profits thereof, shall be maintained when the person is in possession thereof, or defendant in action, or those under whom he claims, has possessed the property under known and visible lines and boundaries adversely to all other persons for 20 years..." (1-40. twenty years adverse possession). According to "Court of Appeals of North Carolina" (2013), “the claimant must show actual, open, hostile, exclusive, and continuous possession of the land claimed for the prescriptive period” (para. 12).......

Words: 1620 - Pages: 7