By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. a New Jersey Condemnation Lawyer When a municipality, county or the state government of New Jersey takes aim at private property to be taken for some public purpose, more often than not any resulting litigation is a contest over the fair market value of the property and how much the property owner should be paid, rather than whether the exercise of the power of eminent domain was appropriate in the first place. From the landowner’s standpoint, it is important to realize that adequate compensation is not determined simply on the basis of the current use of the property. Instead, the landowner is entitled to the value of the property based on its “ highest and …
Eminent Domain Allows Government to Seize Your Land, But Requires Them to Compensate You
By Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq., a NJ Condemnation & Eminent Domain Attorney One of the more controversial laws in New Jersey is that of eminent domain. Basically, the government is allowed to seize privately owned property without the consent of the owner if the land is being used for government use or public purpose. Often, this results in people being forced to move from their homes so the government can create roadways, railroads, public utilities, etc. Fortunately, New Jersey law entitles the owner from whom the property is being seized to adequate compensation. One fairly prominent and recent eminent domain case centered around the revitalization of Peer Village in Long Branch, in which the government seized many private homes in …
Call it Eminent Domain or Condemnation, the End Result is Landowner Gets Settlement for “Taking”
When the government takes aim at private property to be taken for some public purpose, more often than not any resulting litigation is a contest over how much the property owner should be paid, rather than whether the exercise of the power of eminent domain was appropriate in the first place. From the landowner’s standpoint, it is important to realize that adequate compensation is not determined simply on the basis of the current use of the property. Instead, the landowner is entitled to the value of the property based on its “ highest and best” use (whether that use already exists or is only in the eye of a developer), so long as such a potential use is not too …