Superior Court of Delaware, 1952

State Ex Rel. State Highway Department v. Morris

State Ex Rel. State Highway Department v. Morris
Superior Court of Delaware · Decided November 24, 1952 · Herrmann
93 A.2d 523; 47 Del. 477; 8 Terry 477; 1952 Del. Super. LEXIS 208 (Atlantic Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Ralph S. Baker for plaintiff., James M. Tunnell (of Tunnell and Tunnell) for defendants.

State Ex Rel. State Highway Department v. Morris

Opinion

Herrmann, J.,

charged the Commissioners, in part, as follows:

The compensation to which the defendants are entitled is the difference between the market value of their property as a whole immediately before and unaffected by the taking and the market value of the remainder of their property immediately after and as affected by the taking. In adjusting this difference, the parties are entitled to have you consider the value *478 of the property for all available uses and purposes, including the best and most valuable use. 1

' In deciding the issue of just compensation, you should take into consideration the benefits and advantages to the landowners, if any, resulting from the highway improvement and you should set off the value of any such benefit or advantage against whatever loss, detriment or disadvantage you may find the owners have sustained or will sustain by reason of the taking and the highway improvement. 2

1

The Court thus adopted the “before and after” formula for measuring just compensation in a partial-taking case and rejected formulas prevailing in other jurisdictions. See Orgel on Valuation under Eminent Domain, Chapter IV, especially pp. 158,161, 209 et seq.

2

See 1935 Code, § 5730; Huber v. Steel, 14 Del. Ch. 302, 125 A. 673; Whiteman’s Ex’x v. Wilmington & S. R. R. Co., 2 Harr. 514.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.