Keessen v. Soenksen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the factors relied on in using the income method cannot be based on pure speculation without objective evidential support
• finding valuation that ignored comparable property sales evi- dence in valuing alleged mineral property to be “grossly mistaken”
• taking into account land that was purchased and then immediately resold
• evaluating demand for materials from a borrow pit 29 by “having in mind the competition from other pits and other material sources,” including an existing pit owned by the same landowner on land which was not taken “which would compete with the land taken”
• case involved the valuation of land in fee, not the use of government standards for testing the quality of limestone

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).