In condemnation proceedings involving a 34 acre parcel used by the Federal Aviation Administration for aircraft navigation, the district court’s judgment is affirmed where the district court: 1) did not abuse its discretion in excluding defendant’s own testimony when the court had excluded similar testimony by defendant’s expert; 2) did not err in holding that the “before and after” method was appropriate in valuing the property, assuming a partial taking; and 3) did not err in submitting to the jury unity of use. Defendant’s remaining contentions were without merit.
Read US v. Piza-Blondet, No. 08-2263
Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico
Decided September 11, 2009
Judges
Before: Boudin, Seyla, and Dyk, Circuit Judges. Opinion: Dyk, Circuit Judge
Counsel
For Appellant: Paul E. Harrison, Francisco Diez and J. Wayne Mumphrey.
For Appellee: Aaron P. Avila, Attorney, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, John C. Cruden, Acting Assistant Attorney General and Jeffrey M. Tapick, Attorney, U.S. Dep’t of Justice.
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
