Greene v. District of Columbia

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed a judgment awarding Mary Rose Greene approximately $1.85 million for the partial condemnation of her property in the Skyland Shopping Center revitalization project. The court held that severance damages may be screened by the trial court when reasonable minds could not differ regarding unity of use, and that reasonably foreseeable integrated use may support such damages. On the facts presented, Greene offered no evidence that the taken and untaken parcels had a reasonably foreseeable unity of use, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting her appraiser's testimony.

Holdings

1. A trial court may screen a severance-damages claim and exclude it as a matter of law when reasonable minds could not differ regarding the absence of the required unity of use. Unity of use is ordinarily a mixed question of law and fact for the jury, but the court may decide the issue when the material facts are undisputed.
2. Reasonably foreseeable integrated use between the taken and untaken parcels, rather than actual present integrated use alone, is sufficient to support a severance-damages claim if the integrated use would affect the remainder's current market value.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding an additional comparable sale that could have been discovered through due diligence and by excluding alternative valuation techniques that the expert admitted were not primary or stand-alone methods and did not alter his opinion.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly acted as a gatekeeper and excluded evidence of severance damages because Greene lacked evidence of a reasonably foreseeable unity of use between the taken and untaken parcels.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by limiting Greene's appraiser's testimony to valuation founded on completed comparable sales and excluding an additional comparable sale and alternative valuation methods.

Disposition

affirmed