The prospect of losing land in California is always a matter of controversy. This type of seizure can happen for many reasons. It can also take a number of forms. In many cases, a seizure may take the form of eminent domain, followed by condemnation, or inverse condemnation. It’s essential to understand these terms.
Eminent domain is not the same as condemnation
A state or federal entity making use of their right to seize land under the laws of eminent domain can set the stage for a serious round of land use litigation. You should be aware that eminent domain is the right that the government has to take this step. Condemnation is the action of the government as it follows the steps needed to exercise this particular right.
You should keep in mind that condemnation, in this case, has nothing to do with a property being “condemned” in the usual sense. If the city comes in to condemn a building, this just means that no one can live in it until repairs are made. But condemnation under eminent domain means that the government now owns the land.
Inverse condemnation merits a full legal response
The seizure of land by the state or federal government can sometimes result in a scenario that ends in a case of inverse condemnation. Like condemnation, this is a case in which the government takes control of a property. However, in inverse condemnation, the government fails to pay you any kind of compensation.
If you feel that your land was taken by the government without any kind of due compensation, you are entitled to file a claim. It will be up to you to provide all of the necessary evidence to make your inverse condemnation claim as strong as possible.