Lee v. Comm. of Transportation, No. 280436 (Feb. 26, 1991)
Opinion of the Court
While the state will now use all the area within the highway lines for highway purposes, the land of the plaintiff which it has condemned is for minor slope purposes only. Exhibit C, pictures 1 and 4. The land is still fully available for use by the plaintiff except for the erection of structures. The land is of course, subject to the bulk requirements of the town of East Haven zoning laws as previously mentioned.
The state's appraiser has made his evaluation on a before and after basis and has used sales of land for comparables that occurred close to the date of taking. Moreover, two of his three sales are of property located either on Route 80 or less than a city block therefrom. Exhibit 1, pictures 1 3. They are also located approximately one-half mile from subject property. Exhibit 1, map.
The plaintiff's appraiser's testimony and voluminous report, Exhibit C, fail to persuade this court that it should follow his rather tortuous route to reach his conclusion.
The notice of condemnation and assessment of damages filed by the defendant, Exhibit A, indicates that damages are assessed in the amount of $1500. The defendant's appraiser has testified that it is his opinion that the damages suffered by the plaintiff are in the amount of $2,000. Exhibit 1.
The court finds that the plaintiff in aggrieved by the assessment by the defendant of $1,500. damages to the plaintiff for the taking of the slope easement referred to herein and damages are reassessed in the amount of $2,000. Appraisal fees in the amount of $600. are awarded to the plaintiff.
HAROLD M. MULVEY STATE TRIAL REFEREE
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.