(a) The value of the property taken, or of the entire tract if there is a partial taking, does not include an increase or decrease in value before the date of valuation that is caused by (i) the proposed improvement or project for which the property is taken; (ii) the reasonable likelihood that the property would be acquired for that improvement or project; or (iii) the condemnation proceeding in which the property is taken.
(b) If before completion the project is expanded or changed to require the taking of additional property, the fair market value of the additional property does not include a decrease in value before the date of valuation caused by any of the factors described in subsection (a), but does include an increase in value before the date on which it became reasonably likely that the expansion or change of the project would occur, if the increase is caused by any of the factors described in subsection (a).
(c) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b), a decrease in value before the date of valuation which is caused by physical deterioration of the property within the reasonable control of the property owner, and by his unjustified neglect, may be considered in determining value. (1981, c. 919, s. 1.)
Notes of Decisions
PIEDMONT TRIAD REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY v. Unger (2002)
ncctapp · cites it 36×
“General Assembly enacted N.C.G.S. § 40A-65 in 1981. The statute states: Effect of condemnation procedure on value, (a) The value of the property taken, or of the entire tract if there is a partial taking, does not include an increase or decrease in value before the date of…”
Mecklenburg County v. Simply Fashion Stores, Ltd. (2010)
ncctapp · cites it 4×
“Our legislature set forth the scope of the project rule in North Carolina General Statutes, section 40A-65(a): The value of the property taken, or of the entire tract if there is a partial taking, does not include an increase or decrease in value before the date of valuation…”
Town of Nags Head v. Richardson (2018)
ncctapp · cites it 6×
“]” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 40A-65 (2017). The fair market value of the Easement, as a discrete value under Section 40A-64(b)(ii), cannot be derived from factors resulting from the Town’s beach nourishment project under Section 40A-65.”
City of Durham v. Woo (1998)
ncctapp · cites it 4×
“00. The City argues that the evidence presented regarding the value of the subject property reflected the appreciation resulting from the ballpark project, the purpose for which the subject property was condemned, in violation of the “scope of the project” rule found in N.”
Raleigh-Durham Airport Authority v. King (1985)
ncctapp · cites it 3×
“G.S. 40A-65(a) states that the value of the property taken shall not reflect any increase or decrease in value before the date of valuation that is caused by (i) the proposed improvement or project for which the property is taken; (ii) the reasonable likelihood that the property…”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 40A-65(a) — 5 cases
PIEDMONT TRIAD REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY v. Unger (2002)
ncctapp
“General Assembly enacted N.C.G.S. § 40A-65 in 1981. The statute states: Effect of condemnation procedure on value, (a) The value of the property taken, or of the entire tract if there is a partial taking, does not include an increase or decrease in value before the date of…”
Mecklenburg County v. Simply Fashion Stores, Ltd. (2010)
ncctapp
“Our legislature set forth the scope of the project rule in North Carolina General Statutes, section 40A-65(a): The value of the property taken, or of the entire tract if there is a partial taking, does not include an increase or decrease in value before the date of valuation…”
Raleigh-Durham Airport Authority v. King (1985)
ncctapp
“G.S. 40A-65(a) states that the value of the property taken shall not reflect any increase or decrease in value before the date of valuation that is caused by (i) the proposed improvement or project for which the property is taken; (ii) the reasonable likelihood that the property…”
City of Durham v. Woo (1998)
ncctapp
“00. The City argues that the evidence presented regarding the value of the subject property reflected the appreciation resulting from the ballpark project, the purpose for which the subject property was condemned, in violation of the “scope of the project” rule found in N.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 40A-65(c) — 1 case
Raleigh-Durham Airport Authority v. King (1985)
ncctapp
“G.S. 40A-65(a) states that the value of the property taken shall not reflect any increase or decrease in value before the date of valuation that is caused by (i) the proposed improvement or project for which the property is taken; (ii) the reasonable likelihood that the property…”
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.