State, Road Commission v. Brown

3 Citing cases

  1. Utah Dep't of Transp. v. Fpa W. Point, LLC

    304 P.3d 810 (Utah 2013)   Cited 5 times
    Recognizing that the requirement to show a right to just compensation still exists

    .82 Utah 159, 22 P.2d 343 (1933)..531 P.2d 1294 (Utah 1975). ¶ 3 This appeal requires us to consider (I) whether Utah law requires that the values of respective interests in a parcel of condemned property must be individually assessed, and (II) whether that assessment may be conducted in either separate or consolidated proceedings.

  2. Utah Dep't of Transp. v. FPA W. Point

    2012 UT 79 (Utah 2012)   Cited 5 times   1 Legal Analyses

    22 P.2d 343 (Utah 1933). 531 P.2d 1294 (Utah 1975). ¶3 This appeal requires us to consider (I) whether Utah law requires that the values of respective interests in a parcel of condemned property must be individually assessed, and (II) whether that assessment may be conducted in either separate or consolidated proceedings.

  3. West Valley City v. Majestic Inv. Co.

    818 P.2d 1311 (Utah Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 138 times
    Explaining the marshaling requirement

    Turnbaugh v. Anderson, 793 P.2d 939, 941 (Utah App. 1990). Both parties cite State Road Comm'n v. Brown, 531 P.2d 1294, 1296 (Utah 1975), as establishing the criteria for awarding compensation for a leasehold interest. We see no error in the court's application of Brown and expressly reject the claim of double-payment alluded to in briefing.