Seeking Grant of Certiorari Regarding Valuation of Just Compensation for Takings by Eminent Domain
On March 19 the Supreme Court denied certiorari in this case, which NELF had argued presented the Court with an opportunity to resolve two essential questions about valuation under the Just Compensation Clause in eminent domain cases. NELF had filed a joint amicus brief with Pacific Legal Foundation and the National Taxpayers Union in support of the grant of certiorari. Amici noted that the Sixth Circuit’s decision below conflicted with holdings of the First, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits as to whether the Declaration of Taking Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3114 et seq., imposes a mandatory interest rate or just a floor. NELF relied on Supreme Court precedents to argue that, under the Constitution, just compensation is a matter for judicial, as opposed to legislative, determination and, therefore, the statutory interest rate should be deemed a floor and not a ceiling. Amici further urged the Court to review the trial court’s determination, affirmed by the Sixth Circuit, that a decrease in property value resulting from the government’s announcement of an intention to take the property by eminent domain is a basis for decreasing the compensation award.
On March 19 the Supreme Court denied certiorari in this case, which NELF had argued presented the Court with an opportunity to resolve two essential questions about valuation under the Just Compensation Clause in eminent domain cases. NELF had filed a joint amicus brief with Pacific Legal Foundation and the National Taxpayers Union in support of the grant of certiorari. Amici noted that the Sixth Circuit’s decision below conflicted with holdings of the First, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits as to whether the Declaration of Taking Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3114 et seq., imposes a mandatory interest rate or just a floor. NELF relied on Supreme Court precedents to argue that, under the Constitution, just compensation is a matter for judicial, as opposed to legislative, determination and, therefore, the statutory interest rate should be deemed a floor and not a ceiling. Amici further urged the Court to review the trial court’s determination, affirmed by the Sixth Circuit, that a decrease in property value resulting from the government’s announcement of an intention to take the property by eminent domain is a basis for decreasing the compensation award.
RSS Feed