Whenever it is determined in a declaratory judgment proceeding that a person's property has been taken or damaged within the meaning of Article I, § 11 of the Constitution of Virginia and compensation has not been paid or any action taken to determine the compensation within 60 days following the entry of such judgment order or decree, the court which entered the order or decree may, upon motion of such person after reasonable notice to the adverse party, enter a further order appointing commissioners, condemnation jurors, or the court to determine just compensation. The appointment of commissioners, condemnation jurors, or the court to decide the issue of just compensation and all proceedings thereafter shall be governed by the procedure prescribed for the condemning authority. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 25.1-100, the date of valuation in actions pursuant to this section shall be the date determined by the court to be the date the property was taken or damaged.
Code 1950, § 8-581.1; 1968, c. 782; 1971, Ex. Sess., c. 1; 1977, c. 617; 2007, cc. 450, 720; 2010, c. 835; 2014, c. 618; 2025, c. 617.
Notes of Decisions
Kitchen v. City of Newport News, 657 S.E.2d 132 (Va. 2008).
· cites it 46× “" The City argued Count I should be dismissed because the federal takings claim was not ripe for consideration and because Kitchen failed to allege the deprivation of a federal right which was the result of a policy of the City.”
N. Virginia Law Sch., Inc. v. City of Alexandria, 680 F. Supp. 222 (E.D. Va. 1988).
· cites it 28× “2 First, defendants argue that the case is not ripe because plaintiff has not attempted to obtain compensation under a Virginia statute which allows payment for damage to a person’s property.”
Chaffinch v. Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co. of Virginia, Inc., 313 S.E.2d 376 (Va. 1984).
· cites it 10× “Thus, when an inverse condemnation claim is asserted against the sovereign or one of its agencies or political subdivisions, there is some logic in the argument that the statutory mechanism was intended to be the sole remedy available.”
Lee v. City of Norfolk, 706 S.E.2d 330 (Va. 2011).
· cites it 2× “See Code § 8.01-187. By letter opinion, the circuit court found that Lee's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies, i.”
Hampton Roads Sanitation Dist. v. McDonnell, 360 S.E.2d 841 (Va. 1987).
· cites it 2× “2d 376, 378 (1984), we noted that Code § 8.01-187 (former Code § 8-581.1), enacted subsequent to the decisions in Morris and Heldt , now may provide the exclusive remedy for art.”
Hartwell v. Fairfax Cnty., 83 Va. Cir. 105 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2011).
· cites it 10× “The General Assembly was aware of these decisions when it enacted Code § 8.01-187, and we believe that, if it had intended the statutory proceeding “to supersede ordinary causes of action, ” it would have said so on the face of the *110 statute.”
Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac R.R. v. Metro. Washington Airports Auth., 468 S.E.2d 90 (Va. 1996).
· cites it 2× “In this inverse condemnation case, a landowner seeks a determination in a declaratory judgment proceeding under Code § 8.01-187 that its private property has been taken or damaged for public use without just compensation, within the meaning of Article I, Section 11 of the…”
Sheffield v. Dep't of Highways & Transp., 397 S.E.2d 802 (Va. 1990).
· cites it 3× “Implicit in our decision is the assumption, but not the decision, that sovereign immunity would not bar the action of ejectment against the Commonwealth.”
Costello v. Frederick Cnty. Sanitation Auth., 49 Va. Cir. 41 (Frederick Cir. Ct. 1999).
· cites it 6× “Whether or not commissioners will be used to determine the value of the take depends on the nature of the proceeding in inverse condemnation. It is now well established in Virginia law that in inverse condemnation cases, the injured landowner has an option of proceeding either…”
Catholic Diocese v. Commonwealth Transp. Comm'r, 74 Va. Cir. 154 (Alexandria Cir. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 9× “The plaintiffs amended motion for judgment asserts two counts against the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner (“Commissioner”): a declaratory judgment action pursuant to Virginia Code § 8.01-187 and a common law action to directly enforce the takings clause of Article I, §…”
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.