Condemnation

Subscribe to Condemnation

Stark & Stark Shareholder Timothy P. Duggan, Chair of the firm’s Eminent Domain Group, will present at the CLE International’s “Eminent Domain Conference: Preparing You for the Future of Condemnation,” which will be held on March 26-27, 2015, at The Westin in San Diego, CA. Mr. Duggan will be Key Note Speaker…

The increase in oil prices has been a boom for natural gas suppliers as many property owners convert from oil to natural gas. To meet demand and extend service, gas companies are installing new pipelines throughout New Jersey and, in most cases, the pipelines are being installed on private property.
Continue Reading Homeowners and Gas Pipeline-Adversaries Once Again

On May 17, 2011, Timothy P. Duggan, Chair of Stark & Stark’s Eminent Domain and Property Valuation Group, was successful in obtaining a jury verdict in a condemnation action for $4, 450,000. Mr. Duggan represented the owner of an old bank building which was taken by Rowan University. When Rowan University and the property owner could not reach an agreement on the amount of just compensation, the matter was tried before a jury in Camden County, New Jersey.
Continue Reading Stark & Stark Wins Case For Property Owner Against Rowan University

Timothy P. Duggan, Chair of Stark & Stark’s Condemnation & Eminent Domain Group, was quoted in the March 18, 2011 NJ Biz article, N.J. Supreme Court decision could affect commercial lease negotiation.
Continue Reading Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on New Jersey Supreme Court Decision in Eminent Domain Case

On November 1, 2010, the New Jersey Supreme Court refused to review a decision by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey holding that a billboard located along the New Jersey Turnpike was not “real property” under the Eminent Domain Act of 1971. New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. Witt, et. al., Docket No. A-0995-09T3 (App. Div. July 15, 2010).
Continue Reading Billboards: Real or Personal Property When Taken by The Government

In most eminent domain cases, the government will deposit the pre-litigation offer with the Superior Court of New Jersey shortly after the complaint is filed. The property owner (or lien holders) is entitled to withdraw the funds without effecting his or her right to seek additional money from the government. If the property owner is successful in recovering additional money (ie., proving the property is worth more than the government’s appraised value), the government must pay interest on any additional money awarded to the property owner.
Continue Reading Appellate Division Sides with Property Owner Finding that Interest on a Condemnation Award is Not Limited to the Judgment Rate

Timothy P. Duggan, Shareholder of Stark & Stark’s Condemnation group, was quoted in the June 16, 2009 NJ Biz article, Senators announce amendments to eminent domain legislation. The article discusses the recent amendments to State Senate majority leader Steve Sweeney (D-West Deptford) and State Senator Ronald Rice’s (D-Newark) previously proposed eminent domain legislation, which would allow redevelopment in the state while still providing protection and fair compensation to property owners if eminent domain is required.
Continue Reading Stark & Stark Shareholder Comments on Senators’ Amendments to Eminent Domain Legislation

What recourse, if any, does a property owner have when the government relocates a tenant to a new property in anticipation of acquiring the first property by eminent domain, but subsequently decides not to take the property? The answer depends on the length and terms of the lease.
Continue Reading Court Rules Against Property in Case Where Tenant Was Relocated But the Property Was Never Taken

On April 9, 2009, the New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Appellate Division in a case analyzing a condemning authority’s obligation to reimburse a property owner for legal fees and expenses in a condemnation case. Township of West Orange v. 769 Associates, LLC, ___, N.J. __ WL. 962687 (2009).
Continue Reading New Jersey Supreme Court Sides With Property Owner in Dispute Over Legal Fees in Eminent Domain Case