State Through Dept. of Highways v. Wilson
| Decision Date | 29 May 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 12636,12636 |
| Citation | 372 So.2d 632 |
| Parties | STATE of Louisiana, Through the DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS v. Evelina Pierce WILSON et al. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
H. Michael Aaron, Crawford, Lambert & Goldsmith, Gonzales, for defendants and appellees.
Robert Ledoux, James Russell, Johnie E. Branch, Jr., Baton Rouge, for plaintiff and appellant.
Before CHIASSON, EDWARDS and SARTAIN, JJ.
The Department of Highways instituted this expropriation proceeding pursuant to LSA-R.S. 48:441 et seq. to acquire .299 of an acre of land owned by defendants for use in the construction of I-10 in Ascension Parish near Gonzales. The defendants answered, seeking additional compensation for the land taken and an award for severance damages. After trial on the merits, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of the defendants for the sum of $10,372.10 ($568.10 as the stipulated value of the land and $9,804.00 as severance damages), less a credit of $399.00 for the sum deposited by the Department. From this judgment, the Department has appealed.
The sole issue presented for review is severance damages.
Prior to the taking, defendants owned a rectangular tract of and containing approximately 41 acres. The land had frontage on three roads, Louisiana highway 940 on the north of the land, a parish road on the east, and Louisiana highway 30 on the south, and was located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of La. 940 and the parish road. Three buildings were situated on the land two frame residences and another building which was being used as a barber shop and bar. Additionally, the property was within walking distance of numerous other homes and a junior high school.
As a result of the taking, the property is now severed from the populated area to the north by the interstate highway.
Only three witnesses, all expert appraisers, testified at the trial: two appraisers on behalf of the Department and one appraiser for the defendants.
The two appraisers who testified on behalf of the Department stated that they found no severance damages. Both testified that the highest and best use for the land was the same after the taking as it had been before, and that the value of the remainder after the taking was unchanged from its previous value.
The defendants' appraiser, Kermit Wayne Williams, on the other hand, testified that the property had suffered severance damages. He stated that the highest and best use of the land prior to the taking was small acreage homesites with some local commercial use along the northern corner of the property. After the taking, he believed that the highest and best use for the entire tract was small acreage homesites, but to a lesser degree with a lower value. Williams based his conclusion on the isolation of the property from the more populated areas and from the growth pattern of the city of Gonzales caused by the intervening highway. He noted that there was considerable new development along the parish road north of the interstate while there was no development in the area of the subject property. Williams calculated that the property had suffered a diminution in value of 10% Or a $8,804 loss as a direct result of the taking. Additionally, he concluded that the building containing the barbershop and bar had lost its utility, and that $1,000 was needed in damages to convert it back to a residential use.
The trial judge, in his reasons for judgment, found that the property had suffered severance damages, and accepting Williams' testimony, awarded $9,804 in damages to defendants.
The Department, in the first of its two specifications of error, maintains that the trial judge erred in accepting Williams' report and testimony on the issue of severance damages. It argues that Williams' testimony is unsupported opinion and based on two noncompensable factors, circuity of travel and loss of business.
Severance damage is any depreciation in market value of the remainder of a landowner's property caused by the taking. Such damages are recoverable and are ordinarily calculated as the difference between the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Michigan Wisconsin Pipeline Co. v. Hebert
...the permanent right of way before and after the taking. Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Nicholson, supra; State, Department of Highways v. Wilson, 372 So.2d 632 (La.App. 1st Cir.1979); Southwest Louisiana Electric Mem. Corp. v. Beck, 299 So.2d 411 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1974), writ denied, 302 So.2d 3......
-
State, Dept. of Transp. and Development v. Semp Russ Plantations
...error. State of Louisiana, Dept. of Transp. & Dev. v. Bernard, 524 So.2d 808 (La.App. 3d Cir.1988); State, through Dept. of Highways v. Wilson, 372 So.2d 632 (La.App. 1st Cir.1979). Apparently, the testimony of Semp Russ's expert witnesses was given greater credibility in determining the am......
-
Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Nicholson, s. 83CA1060
...Clark; Trancontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation v. Terrell, 416 So.2d 571 (La.App. 1st Cir.1982); State, Department of Highways v. Wilson, 372 So.2d 632, 633 (La.App. 1st Cir.1979). Our review of the record reveals a substantial factual basis for the trial judge's award of severance damage......
-
United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Becnel
...of expert witnesses will not be disturbed on review absent a showing of manifest error. State, Through Dept. of Highways v. Wilson, 372 So.2d 632 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1979). It has also been established that in cases of this type a correct measure of compensation is the market value of the thi......