Home Table of Contents

AMI 2004 Damages—Taking of Easement by Entity Other than Sovereign

Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil

Ark. Model Jury Instr., Civil AMI 2004
Arkansas Model Jury Instructions-Civil
November 2021 Update
Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil
Chapter 20. Eminent Domain
AMI 2004 Damages—Taking of Easement by Entity Other than Sovereign
(The property owner) is entitled to recover the full fair market value of the land contained within (the condemning authority's) easement as if ownership of the land had been completely taken by (the condemning authority) instead of only an easement [plus any damages to the remaining property]. This is the rule even though (the property owner) has the right to continue to use the property for a purpose that is not inconsistent with the use of the easement.
[In this case, (the property owner) claims that [his/her/its] remaining property has lost value as a result of the taking of the easement. This loss in value is called “severance damages” and must be included in determining just compensation if the fair market value of the remaining property is reduced by the taking of the easement. The severance damages to which (the property owner) is entitled is the diminution or lowering of the fair market value, if any, of the property not included in the easement that has been caused by the taking of the easement. The amount of severance damages is the difference between the fair market value of the property not included in the easement before the taking and the fair market value of the property not included in the easement after the taking of the easement.]
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction when (1) the condemning authority is not the sovereign, and (2) the condemning authority is taking an easement over the property rather than fee simple title.
Use the bracketed clause in the first paragraph and the final bracketed paragraph when the property owner claims his remaining property has lost value as a result of the taking.
COMMENT
This instruction is based on Baucum v. Arkansas Power & Light Co., 179 Ark. 154, 15 S.W.2d 399 (1929), Cramer v. Arkansas Oklahoma Gas Corp., 316 Ark. 465, 872 S.W.2d 390 (1994), and Wilmoth v. Southwest Arkansas Utilities Corp., 2015 Ark. App. 185 (2015).
End of Document