posted on October 3, 2000 07:26:32 AM new
I need some help from those with "wordiness" expertise. I have an optional paper that I can do, for school, but I am having a helluva time with some of the material.
The case (I think it has been condensed) can be found here:
I am fine on the emminent domain stuff, and understand that aspect. What I am having trouble with concerns how they came up with the value of the land. See the paragraph starting with "On the other hand..." Can anyone put that into plain english?
If noone can help, that is fine, as I don't have to do this paper, but I just thought I would throw this out there. When I asked Mr.Julesy for help, the most he could tell me was "That is double-talk so they could steal Evans' land." Sigh...
They took a portion of the Evan's farm to build a portion of the Illinois Central RR. He (Evan's) is due compensation for the land taken.
In addition he is due compensation for any and all inconveniences such as having to build additional fences, lowered land value due to his property being split etc.
On the other hand...
It is potentially possible benefit from the RR being built. However, they cannot include the benefit he may receive just because of the placement of the line that may or may not actually be built one day, but will benefit the general population as much as it does him. Instead they use actual benefits he gets from the construction (such as flood control, landscaping, etc.).
In deciding the value he is to receive in compensation the value of the benefits are subtracted from the value of the extra costs incurred. If there is a shortfall he gets compensation. If the benefits value exceeds the inconvenience cost he gets nothing (but does not owe either).
**Disclaimer: If I appear arguementive, then I probably am just being a #*!@ today. It comes & goes. C.
posted on October 3, 2000 08:20:37 AM newCharlotte, you're amazing!
[i]"Instead they use actual benefits he gets from the construction (such as flood control, landscaping, etc.).
In deciding the value he is to receive in compensation the value of the benefits are subtracted from the value of the extra costs incurred. If there is a shortfall he gets compensation. If the benefits value exceeds the inconvenience cost he gets nothing (but does not owe either)."[/i]
The above is exactly what I was looking for, but could not seem to grasp. Many, many thanks for your help.
posted on October 3, 2000 08:51:59 AM new
Ah... does that mean you think I have '"wordiness" expertise'?
**Disclaimer: If I appear arguementive, then I probably am just being a #*!@ today. It comes & goes. C.
)