Tuesday, March 25, 2003 | 11:46 a.m.
CARSON CITY, Nev. - A Nevada lawmaker pressed Tuesday for support of his plan to ensure Nevadans don't get stuck with extra legal fees if they reject a government agency's financial offer for their property.
Assemblyman William Horne, D-Las Vegas, said the threat of being assessed those fees deters people, especially those with limited resources, from exercising their constitutional right to due process.
Horne said AB397 is designed to help people like Dona Tucker, who told the Assembly Judiciary Committee she settled for $34,000 for her property even though her independent appraisal indicated the property was worth more than $200,000. She said she simply couldn't risk being charged the government's legal fees.
"I have no choice but to settle this case for less that what I think was just compensation," Tucker told the committee.
Michael Chapman, a private attorney who specializes in eminent domain cases, said AB397 is designed to help a specific developer's case that he prosecuted when he worked for the state.
A provision of the bill makes it applicable to any instance where a lawsuit is pending on or after Oct. 1, 2003, whether or not the eminent domain case began before that.
The developer wasn't charged legal fees, but Chapman appealed the suit to the Nevada Supreme Court, which could still impose the fees.
Horne insisted he wasn't sponsoring the measure solely to help a large development company.
"I think the bill that I put forward was to help all Nevadans," Horne said. "And I don't think the Constitution applies just to the wealthy or just to the average citizen or just to the poor. It applies to everybody."
"And so for that particular individual to come forward and say this is a bill to overturn one particular case is disingenuous and ridiculous," Horne said.
Chapman also said settlement offers are designed to avoid trial but reach a compromise - not to dissuade people from exercising their rights to due process.
He added that judges can only impose legal fees on people when they determine the citizen was grossly unreasonable in rejecting the government's offer.
Judiciary Chairman Bernie Anderson, D-Sparks, said he expects the committee to change the effective date of the bill and approve it.
"We're concerned that (citizens) not be intimidated from following the due process provisions of the law," Anderson said.
When a governmental entity exercises its right of eminent domain and takes someone's property, that person is guaranteed a right to fair compensation for the property.
If the government and the citizen can't reach an agreement on the fair market value, the case goes to court. If the citizen loses in court, the judge can make that person pay the government's legal fees - which can reach into six figures.
--
archive
