Olive Lane Industrial Park ("Olive Lane") owned real property that was taken by eminent domain. Within four years after the eminent domain order, Olive Lane acquired
2
another parcel of property.1 About five and one-half years after the eminent domain order, for purposes of calculating property taxes on its new property, Olive Lane filed a request with the San Diego County tax assessor (Co

Dale Piercy appeals the district court’s dismissal of his amended action for declaratory relief, which challenged the validity of a herd district ordinance enacted in 1982 by the Canyon County Commissioners. The district court dismissed Piercy’s claim on the basis that it was barred by a seven-year statute of limitations or, in the alternative, a four-year statute of limitations. Piercy challe

This case comes to the Court as a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, the Honorable Edward J. Lodge, U.S. District Judge, presiding. Karen White and her development company, Elkhorn, LLC, seek to recover $166,496 paid to Valley County for “capital investments for roads in the vicinity of [their] White Cloud development.” Pursuant to I.A.R. 12.3(c), this C

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 685.040,1 a judgment creditor is entitled to the reasonable and necessary costs of enforcing the judgment, including statutory attorney fees ―otherwise provided by law.‖ A motion to claim enforcement costs must, however, be made ―before the judgment is satisfied in full.‖ (§ 685.080, subd. (a).)
In the present case, plaintiff Fessha Taye, conserva

¶1 In 1992, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT)
condemned property belonging to Walker Development
Partnership. After nearly twenty years of litigation between UDOT
and Walker, UDOT moved to exclude evidence that it took
property not identified in the 1992 Condemnation Resolution. The
district court granted UDOT’s motion to exclude. We affirm.
UDOT v. Walker Dev

¶1 This case presents the question whether the Utah Depart-ment of Transportation (UDOT) has the authority to use the pow-er of eminent domain to condemn private property in excess of that needed for a transportation project. The condemnation at is-sue involved a fifteen-acre parcel owned by Michael Carlson. UDOT condemned the whole parcel despite the fact that it needed only 1.2 acres for its pl

Our commitment as Americans to the principles of liberty, due process of law, and equal protection of the laws is made live by our adherence to the Constitution of the United States of America. Historical challenges to these principles ultimately culminated in the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment nearly one-and-a-half centuries ago. This Amendment extends the guarantees of due process and equa

State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Department of Transportation v. Sunny Investment Properties, LLC, Whiteco Industries, Inc., Union Bank f/k/a Rose Rock Bank, and Tulsa County Treasurer

Issue # 1.
Issue: CONDEMNATION (CONDEMN)
Filed by: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Filed Date: 07/08/2008
Party Name: Disposition Information:

Defendant: SUNNY INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LLC

Lamar Central Outdoor, Inc. v. City of Tulsa, Tulsa Development Authority, C.H. Carter and CH Carter Family Revocable Trust

Issue # 1.
Issue: INVERSE CONDEMNATION (CONDEMN)
Filed by: LAMAR CENTRAL OUTDOOR INC
Filed Date: 03/19/2007
Party Name: Disposition Information:

Defendant: CITY OF TULSA
Disposed: FINAL ORDER, 06/17/2009. Other.

Defendant

A jury convicted defendant Donald Ray Debose of the first degree murder and second degree robbery of, and arson causing great bodily injury to, Dannie Kim (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 189, 211, 212.5, 451, subd. (a)),1 and it found true special circumstance allegations that Kim‟s murder took place during the commission of arson and robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)). The jury convicted defend

Appellant, Gene Smirl, doing business as “Gene’s Pearland Exxon” and “Pearland Motor Company” (“Smirl”), challenges the trial court’s rendition of

2

summary judgment in favor of appellee, RMJ Miller Real Estate Holdings, Ltd. (“RMJ”),1 in Smirl’s suit against RMJ to recover a portion of condemnation proceeds for the value of his lost leasehold interest in the su

This appeal arises out of a lawsuit Alma Richardson filed to challenge a Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) decision denying her unemployment benefits. Richardson appeals the trial court’s order granting pleas to the jurisdiction

2

in favor of TWC and her former employer, Fort Bend County, Texas. In one issue, Richardson contends that the trial court erred in dismissing her case

Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline, LLC v. Randall John and Mary Ann Wedel

Issue # 1.
Issue: CONDEMNATION (CONDEMN)
Filed by: Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline LLC
Filed Date: 07/02/2013
Party Name: Disposition Information:

Plaintiff: Tallgrass Pony Express Pipeline LLC
Disposed: FINAL ORDER, 05/01/2014. Non-Jury Trial.

Plaintiff: Tallgrass Pony Ex

¶1 Appellant Carlton E. Horner, Jr. seeks review of the trial court's orders denying him a continuance and construing the Last Will and Testament of his father, Carlton E. Horner, Sr., Deceased (Decedent). In this appeal, Appellant asserts the trial court abused its discretion in denying him a continuance to obtain substitute counsel, and erred as a matter of both fact and law in refusing to enfo

¶1 This appeal arises from a condemnation case that proceeded to a jury trial. Defendants/Appellants Patrick L. and Marshaleta Taylor, husband and wife (Landowners), appeal the trial court's Order granting the motion for new trial of Plaintiff/Appellee Independent School District No. 5 of Tulsa County, Oklahoma (Condemnor). The primary question presented on appeal is whether the trial court erred

The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) challenges the trial court’s denial of its immunity-based plea to the jurisdiction and summary judgment motions. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

FACTUAL SUMMARY

This case concerns a traffic accident that occurred in El Paso on February 19, 2010, when Trooper Cesar Cruz ran a red light while pursuing a speeder and struck a vehicle

In this "settle and sue" case,1 Alexander Namikas sued his former attorneys, Paul A. Miller and the Law Offices of Lowthorp, Richards, McMillan, Miller & Templeman P.C. (collectively respondents), for negligently recommending he pay his ex-wife permanent spousal support of $7,000 per month. He alleged the settlement was excessive because respondents improperly calculated his permanent support obli

Appellees and cross-appellants, Charles Bundren and wife Karen Bundren, sued their former landlord, appellant and cross-appellee Steven Dryzer, for retaining their security deposit. Trial was by jury and on a verdict favorable to the Bundrens the court rendered judgment. Dryzer appeals, asserting reversible charge error. By cross-appeal, the Bundrens seek additional attorney’s fees. Finding the

In this case, we consider whether Appellant the City of Keller established as a matter of law that the trial court had no jurisdiction over the inverse condemnation claim brought by Appellees Kimberlee Diane Meadors Hall and A. Thomas Hall. The Halls sued the City alleging that various actions by the City caused repeated flooding of their property. The City filed a plea to the jurisdiction, which

Plaintiffs Biron Family Living Trust and Philip L. and Julie M. Biron as trustees own a 12-unit apartment building in downtown Redding, California, which they purchased in 2001. In February and March 2009, their property was damaged by flooding during two separate storm events. They filed this action against defendant City

2

of Redding (City), alleging inverse condemnation and danger

This intervention action arises out of a former debtor-creditor relationship concerning real property that was damaged by the San Diego County wildfires of 2007. The main action is a master complaint by damaged property owners, including a defaulting borrower, plaintiff, defendant-in-intervention and appellant Paul Thoryk (Appellant), who owned the property at the time of the fires. A year later,

This appeal concerns the acquisition of a piece of real property outside a gated subdivision by a special utility district for use as a utility site and the condemnation of a deed restriction affecting that property. At trial, a jury awarded various individual homeowners, including the developer, in the adjacent subdivision damages for the reduction in value each suffered due to the condemnation.

Ernest Mungia sued his former employer, VIA Metropolitan Transit, and obtained a default judgment. Four years later, VIA attempted to set aside the default judgment by filing a bill of review and a claim for declaratory relief. The trial court granted VIA’s motion for summary judgment as to both causes of action and awarded attorney’s fees to VIA. In one issue on appeal, Mungia contends the tr

In this inverse condemnation case, appellant, the City of Corpus Christi (“the City”), challenges the trial court’s order denying its plea to the jurisdiction. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(8) (West, Westlaw through 2013 3d C.S.). Appellee, Scorpio Development, L.L.C. (“Scorpio”), contends that the City waived its immunity from suit by taking Scorpio’s property for

Appellant, the City of El Paso (“the City”), brings this accelerated interlocutory appeal following the trial court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(8) (West 2008); TEX.R.APP.P. 28.1(a) (stating an appeal from an interlocutory order, when allowed, is accelerated). The City raises three issues for our review.

2

We affirm