Eminent Domain: State of Texas v. Dawmar Partners, Ltd.

Recently, the Texas Supreme Court issued its decision determining whether a landowner is entitled to severance damages resulting from permanent denial of direct access to the highway if the restrictions on access changed the “highest and best use” of the property from commercial to residential. The high court opined that the landowners are not entitled to compensation for diminished value of the remainder because they have not suffered a material and substantial impairment of access.

Contrary to popular belief, not all diminished value in a condemnation case is compensable. In Texas anyway, it is well settled that diminished value resulting from impaired access is compensable only when access is materially and substantially impaired. City of Waco v. Texland Corp., 446 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. 1969). Whether access has been materially and substantially impaired is a threshold question of law reviewed de novo. City of San Antonio v. TPLP Office Park Props., L.P., 218 S.W.3d 60, 66 (Tex. 2007) (citing State v. Heal, 917 S.W.2d 6, 9 (Tex. 1996)).

For the full opinion, click here:

State%20of%20Texas%20v%20Dawmer%20-%20Lorenzana%20Law%20Firm.doc