Bagford v. Ephraim City

Utah Supreme Court

904 P.2d 1095 (Utah 1995)

     For the purposes of eminent domain, “property” includes not only land, but improvements on land, personal property, and intangible or incorporeal rights, such as patents, franchises, contracts, etc.   In order to create protectable property interest, a contract must establish rights more substantial than a mere unilateral expectation of continued rights or benefits.

     A mere expectation that a contract with a public agency will be renewed is not a property right, and a failure to renew the contract does not entitle the contractor to receive compensation in an inverse condemnation claim.

     A private business’s competitive disadvantage in competing with a municipality does not result in a taking of private business property.

Full Text of Bagford v. Ephraim City

RETURN to Takings Cases

Link to Appellate Decisions Section

Advertisements