A Blount Co. couple says runoff from construction of the Union Grove Elementary School ruined their property so they sued for damages. They claim both "inverse condemnation" (e.g. taking by eminent domain) and an alternative negligence claim under "nuisance" theory.
Blount Co. got the lawsuit thrown out based on the the statute of limitations on the "taking" claim. The trial court, upheld on appeal, concluded that the "nuisance" claim goes out with it because their "taking" claim, which was filed too late, proved the damage to their property was "permanent" and thus not an ongoing nuisance.
Catch-22 and no justice for the injured party. There's probably a lesson here somewhere.
- Audit of KCS capital fund accounting complete (4 replies)
- Justice? (46 replies)
- Local Presbyterian church in turmoil over same-sex marriage (13 replies)
- Black Friday Walmart protests (2 replies)
- Tre Hargett wants you to know that Tre Hargett is all about Tre Hargett accountability (3 replies)
- Feel good dog story (2 replies)
- Google Fiber advancing in Nashville? (7 replies)
- Companies accuse Haslam of leading Pilot Flying J fraud (7 replies)
- FYI: Don't buy a teenage boy a sports car (59 replies)
- Citizenfour at Downtown West (6 replies)
- Latest UT athletics drama (9 replies)
- UT dropping "Lady" from "Lady Vols" (58 replies)