VIEWS: 40 CATEGORY: Court & Cases POSTED ON: 12/17/2009
Arizona Court of Appeals District 1 Civil Opinion on A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Maricopa… 1. Does Arizona recognize a claim for inverse eminent domain based on the threat of future flooding? 2. Did the trial court err in denying the farmers' motion for JMOL on their inverse eminent domain claim? 3. Did the farmers prove a prima facie negligence claim? 4. Were the farmers entitled to damages based on the reduced value of their land as a result of the threat of future flooding? 5. Did the trial court err by failing to require the farmers to prove individualized damages? 6. Was the district entitled to sovereign immunity under Arizona Revised Statutes sections 12-820.01 (absolute immunity) and 26-314 (emergency management immunity? 7. Was the district entitled to an assumption of the risk jury instruction? 8. Was the district entitled to assert that the U.S. Corps of Engineers was a non-party at fault? 9. Did the trial court err in precluding the district from asserting its defense at trial that certain farmers were not entitled to damages because they had previously sold flowage easements to the Corps of Engineers? 10. Did the trial court err in precluding the district from defending on the basis that the farmers' alleged illegal floodplain activities barred their claim for the farmers' direct damages? 11. Was the district wrongfully denied the opportunity to present evidence and instruct the damages jury on whether the State of Arizona actually owned the farmers' lands under the equal footing doctrine?
Pages to are hidden for
"A Tumbling-T Ranches v. Maricopa Arizona Court of Appeals 1"Please download to view full document