Eminent Domain

Eminent Domain Pros and Cons

Eminent domain has been a topic of disparate opinions since before it was set down in writing in the Constitution. Indeed, there are both pros and cons to the practice. For example, eminent domain was used in the 1950s redevelopment of an impoverished neighborhood in San Francisco. While the ramshackle homes were replaced with cosmopolitan hotels and other modern edifices, more than 4,000 poverty-stricken denizens, and over 700 businesses were evicted, the buildings demolished and removed.

While it is usually clear that the use of eminent domain to build roads, improve utilities, and revitalize cities, many property owners fear they will not be compensated fully for the seizure of their land. Additionally, as these projects are often paid for with tax dollars, many taxpayers feel that the requirement of paying for land acquired through eminent domain places a monetary burden too great for the perceived benefit of the project.

Имея в виду

Термин «выдающееся владение» был взят из юридического трактата De jure belli ac pacisО законе войны и мира» ), написанного голландским юристом Гуго Гроциусом в 1625 году, в котором использовался термин « dominium eminens» ( латинское «высшее владение»). ) и описал мощность следующим образом:

Осуществление выдающейся области не ограничивается недвижимостью . Осуждавшие могут также забрать личную собственность, даже нематериальную собственность, такую ​​как договорные права, патенты , коммерческую тайну и авторские права

Даже взятие в профессиональной спортивной команды «s франшизы была проведена в Верховный суд Калифорнии , чтобы быть в пределах компетенции„общественного пользования“конституционного ограничения, хотя в конце концов, что принимая во внимание (из Oakland Raiders » NFL франшизы) не допускается потому что это было сочтено нарушением статьи Конституции США о торговле между штатами.

Изъятие собственности должно сопровождаться выплатой «справедливой компенсации» собственнику. Теоретически это должно поставить владельца в такое же финансовое положение, в каком он находился бы, если бы его собственность не была отобрана. Но на практике суды ограничивают компенсацию справедливой рыночной стоимостью собственности, учитывая ее наилучшее и наилучшее использование. Но хотя это редко предоставляется, это не исключительная мера компенсации; см. Kimball Laundry Co. против Соединенных Штатов (коммерческие убытки в связи с временными выручками) и Соединенные Штаты против Pewee Coal Co. (операционные убытки, причиненные правительственными операциями на шахте, захваченной во время Второй мировой войны). В большинстве случаев владельцы не получают компенсации за различные случайные убытки, вызванные изъятием их собственности, которые, хотя и понесены и могут быть легко доказаны в других случаях, рассматриваются судами как не подлежащие компенсации в известной области. То же самое и с гонорарами адвокатов и оценщиков. Но в силу законодательной льготы, а не конституционного требования, некоторые из этих потерь (например, деловая репутация) были компенсированы законодательными актами штата, а в США могут частично подпадать под действие положений Федерального закона о единообразной помощи при переселении .

History of Eminent Domain Law

The notion of eminent domain has existed since ancient times, as documented in the Bible when Samaria’s King Ahab offered compensation to Naboth for his vineyard. Early European nobility commonly took what land they wanted, until 1789, when France publicly recognized the rights of property owners to be compensated for such property seizures.

The practice of eminent domain came to the American colonies as commonly held British law. While drafting the Constitution, conflicting ideas about this practice surfaced, a compromise of which resulted in the final clause to the Fifth Amendment, specifying that compensation was to be made for property seized for public use.

In modern times, eminent domain law is widely used by federal and state governments, and has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Eminent domain law facilitates the creation and upkeep of such necessary infrastructure as roads and highways, parks, and public buildings, as well as water, power, and gas lines. Additionally, eminent domain may be used for urban renewal, replacement of deteriorated housing with new low-cost housing, and beautification of public use areas.

A 1954 Supreme Court decision in Berman v. Parker upheld that it is within the government’s power to use eminent domain to ensure the community is not only healthy, clean, and well patrolled, but that it is beautiful, spacious, and well balanced. In other words, that the term “public use” could properly be construed as that which is in the public’s interest, or for the public’s welfare.

To further the effectiveness of the eminent domain power, the Supreme Court decided, in the 2005 case of Kelo v. City of New London, that the transferring of land from one private owner to another private owner for the purpose of economic development is a permissible definition of “public use.”

The Eminent Domain Appraisal and Fair Market Value

When appropriating property through eminent domain, the government must pay the owner “fair market value” for the property. Fair market value is generally considered to be the amount a buyer and seller are likely agree to if that property was sold on a particular day. For example, the highest amount the seller and a buyer might reasonably agree to on a particular day is considered fair.

Determining fair market value requires an eminent domain appraisal, which is a valuation more than one real estate appraiser. Competent real estate appraisers experienced in eminent domain valuation are often hired by the parties’ eminent domain attorneys. Real estate appraisers often have experience specific to particular home styles and regions, making it important to hire an appraiser experienced in eminent domain cases in the area in which the property lies.

Related Legal Terms and Issues

  • Condemnation Clause. A clause specifying what would occur if the leased property was taken by eminent domain. An effective condemnation clause should define partial and total condemnation, whether the lease agreement may be terminated, and by which party, and who is entitled to compensation for damages.
  • Replacement Cost. The amount required to replace an asset at its condition prior to the loss. Replacement cost often differs from the item’s market value, and does not deduct an amount for depreciation.
  • Salvage Value. The estimated value of a property, improvement, or other asset at the end of its useful life. Subtracting an asset’s salvage value from its cost provides the amount to be depreciated.

Understanding Eminent Domain

Eminent domain is a right granted under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Similar powers are found in most common law nations. Called “expropriation” in Canada, “compulsory acquisition” in Australia, in the U.K., New Zealand, and Ireland eminent domain is known as “compulsory purchase.”

Private property is taken through condemnation proceedings, in which owners can challenge the legality of the seizure and settle the matter of fair market value used for compensation. The most straightforward examples of condemnation involve land and buildings seized to make way for a public project. It may include airspace, water, dirt, timber, and rock appropriated from private land for the construction of roads.

Eminent domain can include leases, stocks, and investment funds. In 2013, municipalities began to consider using eminent domain laws as a way to refinance underwater mortgages by seizing them from investors at their current market value and reselling them at more reasonable rates. Congress passed a law prohibiting the Federal Housing Administration from finance mortgages seized by eminent domain as part of the FY 2015 budget. But it is still an issue that could undermine the mortgage market.

Because contract rights, patents, copyrights, and intellectual property are all subject to eminent domain, the federal government could, theoretically, use eminent domain to seize Facebook and turn it into a public utility to protect people’s privacy and data.

Walling Exploit

These units have been blocked by an Eminent Domain wall, which prevents them from crossing and reaching the player’s base. The wall featured in this screenshot was created by Raynor building a wall of Engineering Bays and then allowing them to die by burning down.

Eminent Domain can be used to construct walls, which will prevent ground units from bypassing them if the wall is complete. Since the game only prevents a Structure from getting taken by Eminent Domain if it was destroyed by a unit under particular criteria, this means that the player could have the buildings destroyed by themselves, without a unit, and thus bypass this check. This is one method players can use to construct Eminent Domain walls, and a wall constructed by Eminent Domain is one of the most powerful defenses a player can use against enemy ground forces as ground units will never be able to get through the Eminent Domain wall (Amon’s units will never attack or even damage a building taken by Eminent Domain as such a building is considered to belong to Amon’s Forces), making this type of wall extremely effective against enemy ground forces.

As such, players can use a Terran character to construct walls, then attack those walls until the walls catch on fire. After this happens, the player then leaves the buildings alone, without repairing them, and letting the fire kill the buildings instead. This will cause Eminent Domain to then check if the killing unit can now path to the player’s starting location, but since there is no killing unit, this check is automatically bypassed and the building will then be converted. This can be done with Zerg buildings as well by having them die from lack of Creep, but this will require extra steps to set up.

An alternative method is to lure enemy units behind the wall and then have them destroy the structures from the other side, which will cause the game’s unit pathing check to count as a success and thus create the Eminent Domain wall after the structures are destroyed.

Note that this it is best to create walls with non-unit-producing Structures as doing this with unit-producing structures will cause the wall to generate units that will then be sent after the player’s base. Supply Depots are also not advised to be used for walls as the game will automatically lower any Supply Depot that is taken by Eminent Domain. Using the cheaper buildings that will result in the lowest price for the wall (i.e. Engineering Bays) while also not backfiring on the player is also recommended to minimize the amount of money one needs to spend for a wall.

Caution should be exercised vs. Stalkers. Although Stalkers won’t use their Blink to try to bypass Eminent Domain walls, they will use their Blink to chase targets they want to destroy, which could accidentally allow them to bypass Eminent Domain walls.

Video Demonstration

Starcraft II- Co-Op Mutation -205 – Call It a Comeback -Mass Liberators-
CtG uses an Eminent Domain wall strategy to beat a Temple of the Past mutation, making sure to take proper countermeasures to combat any threats that might be unaffected by the Eminent Domain walls (such as the Temple of the Past dropship attacks).

Starcraft II- Call It A Comeback -Old Cheese New Flavor-
CtG uses an alternative method of creating Eminent Domain walls that does not rely on burning buildings, again taking care to combat any threats that would be unaffected by Eminent Domain walls (such as Void Thrashers or dropship attacks).


“Enemies gain control of your structures after destroying them.”
(In-game description)

  • This trigger will be applied only to buildings belonging to Player 1 and Player 2.

    The icon for Eminent Domain.

  • Any structures given to Amon’s Forces via Eminent Domain will be restored to full health and shields.
  • If a unit is stored inside of a Structure for any reason, such as if they are placed inside of an Earthsplitter Ordnance or Bunker, then those units will be converted to the Amon’s Forces team as well.
  • Stetillites will not be taken by Eminent Domain.
  • Projections generated via Tesseract Cannons or Tesseract Monoliths will also be commandeered by Eminent Domain, but stolen projections will still have timed life much like the original projections, and will die normally after the timer fully finishes. The original Tesseract Cannons or Monoliths will not behave any differently regardless of whether its projection is stolen or not.
  • If a structure is taken by Eminent Domain, it will try to produce units if possible.
    • Structures that are taken by Eminent Domain in this fashion will produce either a random unit that could normally be built from that structure (i.e. a Marine if one of Raynor’s Barracks gets taken, or an Aegis Guard if Mengsk’s Barracks gets taken). However, this varies considerably depending on character; Dehaka’s Primal Wardens, when taken, will only create units it could normally create, while Nova’s production structures that are taken will create any unit except for the ones it could normally create, for instance.
    • Hatcheries, Lairs, and Hives appear to produce only Zerglings (either normal, Raptor, or Swarmling strains) and Swarm Queens.
    • Production structures that are taken will immediately begin unit production, and will not Lift Off.
    • Units produced by Eminent Domain in this method will be attack-moved towards the nearest Structure belonging to player 1 or player 2 they are aware of, or to any destroyable structures they are aware of that are allied with player 1 or player 2 (the rocks on Temple of the Past, for instance).
    • Units generated in this manner will provide Essence and Biomass.
  • A Structure will not be taken and instead completely destroyed if its health reaches 0 and it meets any of the following criteria:
    • It is under construction at the time it was destroyed.
    • It is any one of the following buildings:
      • Omega Worm
      • Swann’s Laser Drill
      • Fenix’s Purifier Conclave
      • Karax’s Solar Forge
      • Han and Horner’s Starport
      • Joeyray’s Bar
      • Stetillite
      • Toxic Nest
    • It was killed by a unit belonging to player 1 or player 2.
    • If it is killed by a unit, it would prevent the killing unit from being able to draw a ground pathfinding grid to the player’s starting location. (This applies regardless of whether the killing unit is a ground unit or an air unit)
  • Supply Depots that are taken by Eminent Domain will immediately lower.
  • Structures attacked by Propagators will never be given to Amon via Eminent Domain; instead, the Propagator will simply destroy the building completely and spawn a new Propagator where the Structure was once located.
  • Stukov’s Infested Bunkers will not create any Infested Troopers, and his Infested Colonist Compound will not create Infested Civilians if either are taken via Eminent Domain. However, the troopers in the Infested Bunkers will still attack units in range, and the Infested Command Center, Infested Barracks, Infested Factory, and Infested Starports will all generate units if taken by Eminent Domain.
  • Structures that are Salvaged (such as Bunkers or Earthsplitter Ordnances) will destroy themselves completely and provide players with the proper amount of money. They will not be given to Amon via Eminent Domain.
  • If a structure that is currently in the process of salvaging is taken by Eminent Domain, the Structure will be taken, but will still have the Salvage timer active even when it’s taken, and will die when the timer expires. Money will still be awarded to the players even if a Salvaging structure is taken by Eminent Domain.
  • If Alarak Overcharged a Structure and it is taken via Eminent Domain, it will keep the Overcharge and will now start attacking Player 1 and Player 2’s units. An Overcharged structure that was taken by Eminent Domain will also inherit any attack speed buffs from Mastery points.

Eminent Domain Examples

Eminent domain has indeed been used to the benefit of the community in which it has been exercised, but examples of over-reaching or poor planning abound, sparking further controversy. Below are several highly publicized examples of eminent domain cases.

Kelo v. City of New London

The plan to raze the Fort Trumbull district of New London, Connecticut sparked the 2005 Supreme Court ruling that more broadly defined the scope of eminent domain. The plan was for the revitalization of the neighborhood to attract large companies to the area, bringing with them much-needed jobs. Indeed, Pfizer Pharmaceutical expanded to New London, and an upscale hotel, athletic center, conference center, and office park were planned to further update the area. Unfortunately, the massive pharmaceutical company packed up and left town a mere five years after the ruling, taking with it its more than 1,000 jobs. The 70-acre stretch of land on the Thames River that is Fort Trumbull remains mostly empty, the plan for more than 100 rental condominiums to take the place of the previously planned buildings has been held up in a contract dispute ever since.

Julia Lemon v. Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital

In 2005, the state of Georgia, on behalf of Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, attempted to seize a property for the building of a daycare center to serve Georgia’s largest hospital. On the property stood a home owned by Julie Montgomery, and rented by 93-year old Julia Lemon. The hospital offered owner Montgomery the “fair market value” of the property at about $50,000, but she was loathe to displace her elderly tenant, who had lived there for 26 years. The Dougherty County Super Court issued a 2006 ruling on the matter requiring the hospital to pay Montgomery $200,000 for her property, as well as paying $51,000 to Lemon to aid in her relocation. This case emphasizes that the use of eminent domain cannot be all-reaching, but should examine real-life issues when considering property seizures.

Bauder v. Delaware County

Scott and Kathy Bauder fought Delaware County Ohio’s eminent domain grab at the land they had farmed for a quarter of a century, declining the county’s offer of a mere $450,000 for a 10-acre stretch of land that split their holdings. The land was to be used to extend Sawmill Parkway into the Delaware city limits, but the Bauder’s attorneys argued that the area already has adequate roadways.

The jury in the 2013 hearing found that the land was worth a great deal more than the county had offered the Bauders, though not the $1.2 million suggested by a privately employed appraiser. In the end, the county was ordered to pay $850,000 for the land, and an additional $100,000 to cover the Bauder’s legal fees. This decision is typical in such cases, where juries often split the difference between the estimated land values.

Поделитесь в социальных сетях:FacebookXВКонтакте
Напишите комментарий