Lexplug logoLexplug

City of Fort Worth v. Corbin

Texas Supreme Court
504 S.W.2d 828, 1974 Tex. LEXIS 246, 17 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 154 (1974)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

In an eminent domain proceeding, any enhancement in the value of a condemned property due to the public project for which it is being taken ceases to accrue on the date the condemning authority publicly manifests a definite purpose to take the specific parcel of land.


Facts:

  • The cities of Dallas and Fort Worth planned to construct the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport.
  • Mr. and Mrs. W. Boyd Corbin and their daughter, Mary Elizabeth Corbin, owned two adjacent tracts of land totaling 14.834 acres in the area designated for the airport.
  • On April 15, 1968, the two cities executed a contract to construct the airport jointly.
  • On September 27, 1968, the Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport Board formally adopted a preliminary plan for the airport, which included maps that clearly delineated the airport's boundaries and showed the Corbin tracts were within the area to be acquired.
  • On September 30, 1968, the Fort Worth City Council adopted a resolution approving the plan and officially determining that the land within the delineated boundaries was needed for the airport.
  • The Corbins did not receive direct, personal communication from the city or airport board about the impending condemnation of their land until they received a letter on October 27, 1969.

Procedural Posture:

  • The City of Fort Worth filed a petition in condemnation to acquire the Corbins' property.
  • Special commissioners made an award, to which the Corbins filed objections, leading to a trial.
  • At the trial court, the City of Fort Worth's motion to exclude evidence of project-enhanced value after September 30, 1968 was denied.
  • The trial court instructed the jury to use October 27, 1969 (the date of personal notice) as the cutoff date for project enhancement.
  • The jury returned a verdict based on the later date, and the trial court entered a judgment in favor of the Corbins.
  • The City of Fort Worth, as appellant, appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals, which affirmed the trial court's judgment.
  • The City of Fort Worth, as petitioner, then brought the case before the Supreme Court of Texas for review.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

For purposes of determining just compensation in an eminent domain case, does the enhancement in property value due to the public project cease on the date the government publicly manifests a definite purpose to take the specific land, even if the landowner has not yet received personal notice?


Opinions:

Majority - Reavley, Justice

Yes. The enhancement in property value due to a public project ceases on the date the government publicly manifests a definite purpose to take the specific land. The objective of just compensation is to make the landowner whole, not to provide a windfall by allowing them to benefit from the very project for which their property is being taken. Once a property is publicly and definitively identified for acquisition, its market value is no longer influenced by the project's benefits in the same way as adjacent properties that are not being taken. The proper cut-off date is determined by an objective public act of sufficient notoriety—such as the city's formal adoption of plans and maps—that would inform a prudent buyer that the land was designated for the project, rather than the subjective date of the landowner receiving personal notice. In this case, the City of Fort Worth's approval of the airport plan on September 30, 1968, constituted a public manifestation of a definite purpose to take the Corbin's land, and no project-induced enhancement should be compensated after that date.



Analysis:

This decision clarifies the Texas rule for calculating project-enhanced value in eminent domain cases, establishing an objective standard over a subjective one. By setting the cutoff date at the point of public, definite designation, the court prevents landowners from receiving a windfall and provides condemning authorities with greater certainty in project costs. This precedent standardizes the valuation process by tying it to a specific, public governmental act, ensuring that compensation is based on the fair market value absent the distorting effects of the project itself after the taking becomes a certainty. It influences future cases by requiring trial courts, not juries, to determine this cutoff date based on evidence of public acts rather than private communications.

G

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: City of Fort Worth v. Corbin (1974)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"