AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals held that a landowner can defend against a proposed condemnation by demonstrating that the declared public purpose for the taking is a mere pretext for conferring benefits on private parties.
Samuel Franco owned a store called Discount Mart located in the Skyland Shopping Center, which contained approximately 30 similar businesses. In 1998, the District of Columbia created the National Capital Revitalization Corporation (NCRC) and authorized it to use eminent domain to acquire and assemble real estate in redeveloping blighted areas. In 2002, NCRC entered into an agreement with four private developers to redevelop the Skyland Center along with five adjoining acres into a "first-class, quality mixed-use retail center." In 2004, NCRC introduced a bill into the legislature seeking approval to use eminent domain to acquire Skyland Center properties. The bill stated that the properties were "necessary and desirable for the public use" but did not explain why. After six months of review, the legislature approved a different version of the bill declaring that the Skyland Center was a "blighting factor" in the community and that its redevelopment would serve many important public purposes, including crime reduction and economic revitalization of the community. In 2005, NCRC filed suit to condemn Franco's property.
To defend against the taking, Franco presented evidence to demonstrate that the Skyland Center was not blighted, that the condemnation was an unconstitutional taking of property for a private use, and that the declared public purpose for the taking was pretextual. The trial court did not consider whether the taking in fact served a public purpose, finding instead that the legislature's finding of a public purpose prevented Franco from arguing that the stated reason is pretextual. The court ruled that the taking was proper. Franco appealed.
On appeal, the District's highest court noted that under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New ...
Source: HighBeam Research, Landowner can prevent condemnation by showing that legislature's...