Where any condemner shall have taken or attempts to take property for public use, the damages for taking such property shall be determined according to the laws of this state irrespective of whether the condemner may be reimbursed for a part of such damage from the federal government and such damages shall include all compensable damages suffered by the condemnee including but not limited to reasonable severance damages and condemnee's abstracting expenses. In determining the amount of such severance damages, account shall be taken, together with other relevant factors, of the economic effect, if any, caused by the severance therefrom of the part taken or sought to be taken upon the whole of such property as a going concern as it will be and remain after the severance. Any decrease or increase in the fair market value of real property prior to the date of valuation caused by the public improvement for which such property is acquired, or by the likelihood that the property would be acquired for such improvement, other than due to physical deterioration within the reasonable control of the owner, shall be disregarded in determining the compensation for the property. The provisions of this section shall apply to any case now or hereafter pending.
Notes of Decisions
Heye Farms v. State, Dept. of Roads, 558 N.W.2d 306 (Neb. 1997).
· cites it 2× “shall include all compensable damages suffered by the condemnee including but not limited to reasonable severance damages and condemnee’s abstracting *645 expenses.”
Fulmer v. State, Dep't of Roads, 134 N.W.2d 798 (Neb. 1965).
· cites it 4× “The plaintiff was entitled to recover this expense under section 76-710.01, R.S.Supp., 1963, and the jury was so instructed.”
Pieper v. City of Scottsbluff, 126 N.W.2d 865 (Neb. 1964).
· cites it 2× “That original section 76-720, Reissue Revised Statutes of Nebraska, 1943, and section 76-710.01, Revised Statutes Supplement, 1961, are repealed.”
Mobeco Indus., Inc. v. City of Omaha, 598 N.W.2d 445 (Neb. 1999).
· cites it 9× “Mobeco contends that because severance damages are not an issue in this case, the trial court was correct in refusing to include the third paragraph of NJI2d Civ. 13.02 in the jury instructions.”
Bickels v. State, Dep't of Roads, 135 N.W.2d 872 (Neb. 1965).
· cites it 2× “This section reads as follows: “Where any condemner shall have taken or attempts to take property for public use, the damages for taking such property shall be determined according to- the laws of this state irrespective of whether the condemner may be reimbursed for a part of…”
Mathis v. State, Dep't of Roads, 135 N.W.2d 17 (Neb. 1965).
· cites it 3× “Section 76-710.01, R.S.Supp., 1963. The plaintiff testified that on February 14, 1963, he entered into a written lease agreement with Stoner System, Inc.”
Hike v. State (Neb. 2014).
· cites it 5× “”14 They also argue that the admis- sion of the evidence, or at least the reference to it in NDOR’s closing argument, violated Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-710.01 (Reissue 2009), which provides in relevant part: Any decrease or increase in the fair market value of real property prior to…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.