AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The City of Albuquerque initiated a condemnation proceeding to construct the Albuquerque Rapid Transit system, taking a 5,279 square-foot strip of land from Tecolote Resources, Incorporated's property, West Central Plaza. The parties agreed on a fair market value of $69,350 for the taken land. Tecolote sought additional compensation, claiming $2,931,454 for impairment of access to its remaining property due to the construction, which included building a median on Central Avenue that prevented left turns into and out of the property and affected access points (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: Jury verdict awarded Tecolote $712,000 as just compensation for the City’s taking of part of its lot, including compensation for impaired access (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellant (City of Albuquerque): Argued that the jury was not properly instructed on the causal connection between the taking and the claimed damages, contended that damages for impaired access caused by a partial taking should only be awarded if the impairment is unreasonable, and argued that Tecolote had a duty to mitigate its damages to its right of access (paras 5-6).
• Defendants-Appellees (Tecolote Resources, Inc., et al.): Sought compensation for the impairment of access to its remaining property following the City's taking of part of its lot for the construction of the Albuquerque Rapid Transit system, claiming the construction significantly impaired access to the property (paras 2-4).

Legal Issues

• Whether the jury was properly instructed regarding the causal connection between the taking and the claimed damages.
• Whether damages for impaired access in a partial taking case should only be awarded if the impairment is unreasonable.
• Whether Tecolote had a duty to mitigate its damages to its right of access (paras 5-6).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment, rejecting the City's claims of instructional error regarding causation, the requirement of unreasonableness for damages for impaired access, and the duty to mitigate damages (para 1).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Ives, J., with Attrep, C.J., and Bogardus, J., concurring, held that the jury instructions given were adequate to convey the law regarding causation in partial takings cases and that the City failed to demonstrate that the district court's refusal of the City's requested instruction warranted reversal. The court concluded that New Mexico law does not require the owner to prove that the resulting access to their remaining property is unreasonable in partial takings cases. Furthermore, the court found that the pretrial order, which did not include the City’s mitigation of damages defense, controlled the scope of the trial, and the City did not preserve its argument that the district court should have amended the pleadings. The court suggested that the UJI Civil Committee consider adding a use note for UJI 13-719 and referring to Section 42A-1-26, where applicable, in the commentaries to the uniform instructions (paras 7-28).