Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
 Victory Against Eminent Domain >

Victory Against Eminent Domain

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Victory Against Eminent Domain

Old 06-13-2007, 03:47 PM
  #1  
Boone & Crockett
Thread Starter
 
Aught Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,220
Default Victory Against Eminent Domain

NJ court: eminent domain requires blight

***

Darn right...

Small victory when you look at the big picture, but it's a good step forward.
Aught Six is offline  
Old 06-13-2007, 04:13 PM
  #2  
Giant Nontypical
 
bawanajim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: PA
Posts: 8,166
Default RE: Victory Against Eminent Domain

This is the one thing that really pizzes me off. This is America if we lose private property rights we have lost all of our rights..

The moron that started this should be fired for even thinking about taking a mans land.
bawanajim is offline  
Old 06-13-2007, 04:14 PM
  #3  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 760
Default RE: Victory Against Eminent Domain

that is great . Now we need the US Supreme Court to revisit and redo their horrible decision on eminent domain. How they ever came to that decision is a mystery and horrible precident
archer 2 is offline  
Old 06-14-2007, 06:02 AM
  #4  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 1,183
Default RE: Victory Against Eminent Domain

we have a case right now, where the city i live in wants to build a shopping center (they've already started) and they forced some of the people out of their homes. there was one small business owner who has succeeded so far in stalling their plans by fighting them in court.

in the end, i'm sure he's going to end up losing, though...

i hate the idea tha someone can just come in and take your home away for a shopping center.

Property owner wins eminent domain case in Arnold[/align]By Robert Kelly[/align]ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH[/align]05/22/2007[/align]
[/align]
ARNOLD ‚ÄĒ Dr. Homer Tourkakis will be able to keep his dental office here, even though the city has condemned the property to help make room for the large Arnold Commons shopping center, a Jefferson County circuit judge ruled Monday.

"It is the court's opinion that government has the inherent power to take private property by eminent domain for true public purposes," Judge M. Edward Williams wrote in his three-page ruling.

"These uses would include the construction of roads, sewer systems, water lines and many others but most emphatically would not include the construction of a shopping center by a private developer as is the case here," the judge said.

Kelley Farrell, attorney for Arnold, said the ruling would be appealed.






[/align]
"We definitely think it is constitutional and that Arnold acted properly," said Farrell.

Even so, Tourkakis claimed victory over the city's attempt to take his dental office at 1506 Big Bill Road.

"We're very satisfied," Tourkakis said. "Government should not get involved in private enterprise."

The judge heard arguments in the case in January. At the time, Williams expressed some sympathy for the dentist.

"This is not a public use" of the land, as required for redevelopment under eminent domain laws, Williams said from the bench.

"You will never convince me that a shopping center is a public use," he said.

On the other hand, Williams said he had some doubt that he would have the authority to overturn the Arnold City Council's decision to declare Tourkakis' office and surrounding land blighted.

But in his ruling on Monday, the judge said he did not believe that Arnold had the constitutional power as a third-class city under Missouri law to declare private property as blighted for redevelopment by a private developer.

The construction of Arnold Commons is continuing around Tourkakis' property. He was among the last holdouts against selling his property for the shopping center project.

Farrell said she was unsure whether the city would continue to negotiate with Tourkakis while the judge's ruling was appealed.

Tourkakis previously declined the city's offer of $343,750 for his office and the surrounding land.

[/align]
david m is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bigbulls
Politics
4
03-09-2009 09:24 PM
Lanse couche couche
Politics
9
07-28-2006 07:20 AM
rick_reno
Politics
12
06-28-2005 11:59 AM
tardfarmer
Politics
34
06-24-2005 09:30 PM
badshotbob
Politics
21
09-22-2004 11:11 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Quick Reply: Victory Against Eminent Domain


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.