8,960 Square Feet, More or Less v. State, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding landowner entitled to compensation from state only “where diminished visibility results from changes on the property taken from the landowner, but not where it occurs due to changes on the property of another”
• allowing compensation for lost visibility based on changes to taken parcel, but not for similar changes made on existing right of way
• allowing compensation for lost visibility based on changes to taken parcel but not for similar changes made on existing right of way
• hold-ing that visibility damages are compensable because Dooley and Troiano overlook the fact that as long as there is a road adjacent to the taken property, part of the value of that property consists of the right to control the visibility of land further away from the road
• action by state on adjoining railway lands of raising earth berms gave rise to no claim for loss of visibility of landowner’s property since the railroad could have raised its tracks or otherwise obstructed visibility of the land in question for any legitimate reason
• action by state on adjoining railway lands of raising earth berms gave rise to no claim for loss of visibility of landowner's property since the railroad could have raised its tracks or otherwise obstructed visibility of the land in question for any legitimate reason

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).