The Changing Legal Landscape
The law of property rights is changing extremely rapidly. The United States Supreme Court has specifically acknowledged that, under the Constitution, property ownership is on a par with personal liberty. See Lynch v. Household Finance Corp, 405 U.S. 538, 92 S. Ct. 1113 (1972).
Closer to home, Waldo & Lyle has been on the cutting edge of two relatively recent decisions by the Supreme Court of Virginia, both of which advance the rights of property owners in condemnation proceedings. These cases, each of which was argued successfully by Joseph L. Lyle, Jr., promote the positions of developers of commercial real estate and billboard companies.
In Revocor Corp. v. Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, decided in March 2000, the Supreme Court held that an owner/developer was entitled to show, through the testimony of a professional engineer, a myriad of difficulties and expenses amounting to almost $400,000 caused by the change in the configuration of the remaining property after the taking. These expenses were in addition to the value of the property that was actually taken.
In Snyder Plaza Properties v. Adams Outdoor Advertising, decided in April 2000, the right to compensation to a billboard company which was a short-term tenant was held to include the "expectancy," based on past history, that the lease would continue to be renewed even after its expiration date. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the billboard company couldn't recover for what might or might not happen in the future. This decision is a legal boost to the billboard industry, in which the billboard company often operates under short-term leases. In this important decision, the Supreme Court of Virginia plowed new ground and departed somewhat from courts' traditional rejection of recovery for "what might happen" as being unduly speculative. The decision was received enthusiastically by the billboard industry.
The law of property rights is changing extremely rapidly. The United States Supreme Court has specifically acknowledged that, under the Constitution, property ownership is on a par with personal liberty. See Lynch v. Household Finance Corp, 405 U.S. 538, 92 S. Ct. 1113 (1972).
Closer to home, Waldo & Lyle has been on the cutting edge of two relatively recent decisions by the Supreme Court of Virginia, both of which advance the rights of property owners in condemnation proceedings. These cases, each of which was argued successfully by Joseph L. Lyle, Jr., promote the positions of developers of commercial real estate and billboard companies.
In Revocor Corp. v. Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner, decided in March 2000, the Supreme Court held that an owner/developer was entitled to show, through the testimony of a professional engineer, a myriad of difficulties and expenses amounting to almost $400,000 caused by the change in the configuration of the remaining property after the taking. These expenses were in addition to the value of the property that was actually taken.
In Snyder Plaza Properties v. Adams Outdoor Advertising, decided in April 2000, the right to compensation to a billboard company which was a short-term tenant was held to include the "expectancy," based on past history, that the lease would continue to be renewed even after its expiration date. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the billboard company couldn't recover for what might or might not happen in the future. This decision is a legal boost to the billboard industry, in which the billboard company often operates under short-term leases. In this important decision, the Supreme Court of Virginia plowed new ground and departed somewhat from courts' traditional rejection of recovery for "what might happen" as being unduly speculative. The decision was received enthusiastically by the billboard industry.
