Summary
The Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 arising from New York’s acquisition of their property by eminent domain. The court held that the State’s failure to provide notice that it would not conduct additional hearings did not violate due process, and that landowners have no due process right to an adversarial proceeding to prevent acquisition after a public-use determination. The court also concluded that the State timely commenced acquisition proceedings under New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law § 401.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether New York violated procedural due process by failing to give plaintiffs written notice that it would not conduct additional hearings after determining that the proposed taking was exempt from further formal notice and hearing procedures.
- Whether plaintiffs had a procedural due process right to an adversarial proceeding after the public-use determination and before the State acquired the property.
- Whether the State timely commenced acquisition proceedings under New York Eminent Domain Procedure Law § 401(A).
Holdings
- The State's failure to notify plaintiffs that it would not conduct additional hearings beyond those required under EDPL § 206 did not violate due process, particularly because compliant public hearings had already occurred and plaintiffs did not challenge the public-use determination.
- A landowner has no due process right to prevent acquisition of real property by eminent domain after the government determines that the property is needed for a public use.
- The State's acquisition was timely because the three-year period began on December 19, 2002, when the Federal Highway Administration designated the parcel, rather than in 1999 when the State completed its draft environmental impact statement.
Key quotations
“However, a landowner has no due process right to prevent the acquisition of realty by eminent domain after a determination that such property is needed for a public use.” (40)
Factual background
New York acquired plaintiffs' real property by eminent domain for a bridge and road construction project. Public hearings complying with the applicable requirements of New York's Eminent Domain Procedure Law were held before the State made its public-use determination, and the plaintiffs did not challenge that determination. Plaintiffs purchased the property after the initial hearings with written notice that it was being considered for condemnation. The State acquired the property within the three-year period measured from the Federal Highway Administration's December 19, 2002 designation of the parcel.
Procedural history
The Northern District of New York granted defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint in a January 10, 2007 judgment. Plaintiffs appealed, arguing that New York's eminent-domain procedures violated procedural due process. The Second Circuit affirmed.