Blog
Delays on I-69 Construction Project and the Impact on Section 6 Land Acquisitions
By: J. Eric Rochford, Eminent Domain Attorney
By now I’m sure all Hoosiers are well aware that the construction of I-69 Section 5 between Bloomington and Martinsville has been significantly delayed – by significant I’m referring to years, not months. The primary design-build contractor and subcontractor for this section of the I-69 Project, I-69 Development Partners and Isolux Corsan, completely blundered the project and Isolux Corsan is now pending bankruptcy. The big question for the property owners along the final portion of the I-69 Project, Section 6, is: what impact do the delays on Section 5 have on the timing for the land acquisition process for Section 6?
The Impact of IndyGo Red Line Project for Broad Ripple Property Owners
By: J. Eric Rochford, Indianapolis Eminent Domain Attorney
The City of Indianapolis’ most recent effort in “rapid transit” is the IndyGo Red Line. Phase 1 of this project is estimated to cost $96 million. It will travel from College Avenue in Broad Ripple, along 38 Street, down Meridian Street, through Fountain Square and ending at the University of Indianapolis. The 13.5-mile stretch of bus line will require the elimination of travel lanes, parking spots, and driveways on College Avenue, 38th Street, Meridian Street and Virginia Avenue. The project is almost certain to have a significant impact on vehicular traffic both during and after construction for those drivers who use these streets in Broad Ripple and downtown Indianapolis. However, some property owners will bear a much more significant burden.
What is an Order of Protection?
By: Casandra L. Ringlespaugh, Attorney
The Indiana Civil Protection Order Act, or ICPOA, is a set of laws passed Indiana in 2002 in regards to domestic and family violence. Under the ICPOA, Courts can issue Orders to protect people from domestic or family violence, stalking, or a sex offense. These Court Orders are called “Protection Orders” or “Orders for Protection,” and the terms are used interchangeably. A protective order may be issued when a Judge finds, by a majority of the evidence, that the respondent (other person) represents a credible threat to the safety of petitioner…
Use of File Sharing Site Causes Waiver
By: Arend J. Abel, Attorney
Lawyers for an insurance company got a nasty surprise when a federal district court held that their use of the file-sharing service Box® waived attorney-client privilege and work product protections for the company’s entire claims file. On February 9, in Harleysville Insurance Company v. Holding Funeral Home, the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia decided that putting the file in an online “folder” for which it had previously sent a link to a third party waived both the attorney-client and work product protection.
Judicial Qualifications Commission Gives Green Light to Tweeting at Trial
By: Arend J. Abel, Attorney
You may remember just over a year ago when a partner in Barnes & Thornburg’s Chicago office was sanctioned for live-tweeting a trial. That event makes all the more surprising an Ethics Opinion that the Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications issued last month. According to the Commission, live-tweeting a trial does not amount to “Broadcasting,” which is barred by Rule 2.17 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, except in very narrow circumstances or with prior permission of the Supreme Court.
How to Read a Right-Of-Way Appraisal
By: J. Eric Rochford, Attorney
If you’ve ever bought or sold a home or any type of real estate, you have almost certainly seen (and hopefully) read a real estate appraisal. Typically, appraisals are in the standard 6-page Uniform Residential Appraisal Report format. However, appraisals for eminent domain/condemnation purposes Right-of-Way (“ROW appraisals”) are much different.
How Does An Eminent Domain Action Affect Your Mortgage?
By: J. Eric Rochford, Attorney
Generally speaking, your mortgage won’t be negatively affected by a partial land taking. However, depending on the status of your mortgage, your mortgage holder may get involved in your condemnation case and attempt to claim some or all of the proceeds. However, it’s still a good idea to keep your mortgage holder informed of a possible land taking.
Can You Ask the State to Take Your Property Early by Eminent Domain?
By: J. Eric Rochford, Attorney
If you live along the SR 37 corridor that has been identified as the I-69 Expansion Project Section Six that stretches from Indianapolis to Martinsville, you may have asked yourself the above question. Asking the state of Indiana to take your property early relates to what is called hardship/advanced acquisition or protective buying. Hardship/advanced acquisition is a method the state could use to take private property earlier than planned in order to lessen some type of health or financial situation for the property owner. Protective buying is a little different and refers to an action by the government to take a particular piece of land early to prevent imminent development and increased costs within a preferred location for the project.
How much does it cost to hire an eminent domain attorney?
By: J. Eric Rochford, Attorney
Landowners are often concerned that they can’t afford to hire an attorney or that, if they do hire an attorney, the attorney will take most of the settlement proceeds. This is not the case with contingent fees in eminent domain cases. These fee agreements have become commonplace as potential clients prefer not to spend money upfront to hire an attorney and want to have a way to encourage the attorney to get them the most money possible out of their case. Contingent fee contracts are created to do exactly that. In its most basic form, a contingent fee agreement says that a client will not owe an attorney any money for representing them until and unless the attorney obtains a settlement or secures a favorable verdict at trial. In that event, the attorney takes his fee out of the proceeds the clients gets from their case. If an attorney is not able to settle the case and does not win at trial, then the clients owe the attorney no money for his work.
The Indiana Appellate Rules Do Not Allow Exhibits in the Appendix or Citations in Footnotes
By: Arend J. Abel, Attorney
[November 17, 2016]– The Indiana Court of Appeals issued an opinion today in which it said Exhibits should not be put in the Appendix. Sperro, LLC v. Ford Motor Credit Company, LLC. In footnote 4 of the opinion, the Court said:“Appellants’ and FMCC’s appendices do not comply with the Indiana Rules of Appellate Procedure because they contain exhibits, which are considered part of the transcript and therefore are not to be reproduced in an appendix pursuant to Appellant Rules 29 and 50(F).”