G Henslee wrote:
Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

This wouldn't be too bad in practice (athough still bad in principle)
if the city reckoned compensation on the basis of the resultant
commercial zoning. E.g., Individual A's property is a% of the total
area whose commercial value is $X million, so s/he gets a% of $X
million rather than "fair market value" of the residence being taken.

Perce


On 06/24/05 10:57 am G Henslee tossed the following ingredients into
the ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._scotus29.html



I'd be willing to bet $X million that will never happen.

If someone wasn't planning on doing that why did it get placed for the
Supreme Court to make a decision on ?



--
If you find a posting or message from myself offensive,
inappropriate, or disruptive, please ignore it. If you don't know
how to ignore a posting,complain to me and I will demonstrate.