Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Department of Highways

CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky
DecidedMay 26, 2022
Docket2021 CA 000399
StatusUnknown

This text of Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Department of Highways (Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Department of Highways) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Department of Highways, (Ky. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

RENDERED: MAY 27, 2022; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

NO. 2021-CA-0399-MR

DLX, INC. APPELLANT

APPEAL FROM JOHNSON CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JOHN DAVID PRESTON, JUDGE ACTION NO. 19-CI-00185

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS APPELLEE

OPINION REVERSING AND REMANDING

** ** ** ** **

BEFORE: CALDWELL, MCNEILL, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES.

TAYLOR, JUDGE: DLX, Inc., brings this appeal from an April 6, 2021,

Amended Interlocutory Order and Judgment of the Johnson Circuit Court in an

eminent domain proceeding. We reverse and remand.

On June 26, 2019, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Transportation

Cabinet, Department of Highways (Cabinet) filed a petition to condemn mineral rights1 owned by DLX in approximately 152 acres of real property located in

Johnson County, Kentucky. The property was condemned for the purpose of

correcting a rockfall hazard on Kentucky Highway 321. In the petition, the

Cabinet particularly described the mineral estate in the 152 acres subject to

condemnation but also sought to condemn the following:

Grantor further waives, forever, all rights and claims for those coal reserves[2] outside the boundary of the property conveyed herein which may become sterilized[3] as a result of the construction of the highway and/or construction contemplated herein, including the 150 foot statutory barrier, and the loss of access for many potential mining sites to the main highway.

Petition at 6.

DLX filed an answer and counterclaim. In the counterclaim, DLX

specifically claimed:

14. a. The Petitioner did not negotiate in good faith with DLX, abused its discretion in so doing, and otherwise acted unreasonably in regard thereto for reasons which include, but are not limited to, the following:

i. The Petition alleges that DLX owns the mineral underneath the tracts to be acquired, which total

1 It appears that the oil and gas rights to this property were separately owned by Kentucky West Virginia Gas. The surface estate was acquired by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Transportation Cabinet, Department of Highways (Cabinet) in 2015 for $2,499,000. 2 It was established that DLX, Inc., owned approximately 443 acres of minerals adjacent to the 152 acres of minerals condemned by the Cabinet. 3 According to expert testimony at the hearing, coal is sterilized when it cannot be removed as a result of some action, involving the surface or mineral estate.

-2- 145.16 acres according to the Petitioner’s appraisal, and both it and its appraiser noted that DLX also owned other adjacent mineral parcels owned [sic] totaling, together with the 152.302 acres to be acquired, approximately 596 acres, leaving approximately 443.698 acres after the proposed taking.

ii. The Petitioner’s appraisal, upon which it claimed to have relied in making an offer of $60,900.00 to DLX, ascribed a value of approximately $400.00 an acre to DLX’s mineral rights in the property to be acquired and $0.00 for a decrease in the fair market value of DLX’s remaining adjacent mineral tracts, even though the Petition alleges that these interests in those properties are to be acquired:

[A]ll rights and claims for those coal reserves outside of the boundary of the property conveyed herein which may become sterilized as the result of construction of the highway and/or construction contemplated herein, including the 150 foot statutory barrier, and the loss of access for many potential mining sites to the main highway[,]

nor did it identify or appraise the other interests and damages that DLX would suffer as the result of the proposed taking as alleged elsewhere herein, which are incorporated herein, including the allegations and exhibits found in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Counterclaim.

....

iv. Neither the Petition nor the Petitioner’s appraisal:

-3- 1. describe DLX’s adjacent properties nor the area constituting the “150 foot statutory barrier[.]”

15. In addition to the foregoing failure to negotiate in good faith, and other wrongful conduct that is alleged hereinabove, the Petitioner also failed to conduct these proceedings in good faith, abused its discretion in so doing, and otherwise acted unreasonably in regard thereto for reasons which include, but are not limited to, the following:

a. the Petitioner unreasonably delayed the resolution of the taking from DLX while generously compensating others with interests in the same boundary of land;

b. the Petition lacks Exhibit A, which is supposed to depict the boundaries of the proposed taking, thereby denying DLX important information;

d. the Petition does not allege a sufficient basis for transferring the title to the coal in the project area to a private party and allowing them to profit therefrom at DLX’s expense;

e. the Petitioner did not enable the commissioners to comply with their statutory requirements which included, but are not limited to, the following:

i. the commissioners did not view the property to be condemned as it cannot,

-4- without technical assistance seen, quantified, assessed, or “viewed”;

iii. It is impossible that the commissioners conducted their valuation correctly because they failed to assign a “fair market value of so much of the tract as remains immediately after the taking[,]” which is approximately 443.698 acres, which also means that they did not value all of the interest when assigning a value of $136,000.00 to the blank of the form for “A.”

Answer and counterclaim at 21-23, 26-28.

The circuit court held an evidentiary hearing on March 15, 2021, as

concerns the Cabinet’s right to condemn the subject property. On the next day,

March 16, 2021, an order was entered that “overruled” DLX’s “objections.”

Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 416.610. The circuit court held that it was

unable to conclude that the Cabinet abused its discretion or acted in an arbitrary or

capricious manner. Additionally, the circuit court decided that the Cabinet

negotiated with DLX in good faith. The circuit court reasoned, in relevant part, as

follows:

9) Applying that standard to the case at bar, it is necessary for the Court to determine if the Plaintiff abused its discretion or if the Plaintiff failed to act in good faith in bargaining with the Defendant prior to filing the lawsuit. The Court notes in this regard that the testimony indicated that the Plaintiff made an offer to the Defendant for $58,000.00 for the mineral interest in the

-5- tract in question in January 2017. The evidence indicated that the Cabinet will ordinarily wait forty-five days before proceeding further, but in this case the Plaintiff showed remarkable patience, in that no action was filed until August, 2017, some seven months after the initial offer was made. The other further [sic] showed that the Defendant failed to make any counteroffer whatsoever after receiving the initial offer by the Plaintiff. It could scarcely be said that the Plaintiff failed to negotiate in good faith, when the position of the Defendant was essentially that the Plaintiff should bid against itself.

10) The question arises as whether the offer made by the Plaintiff was reasonable or whether it was arbitrary and capricious. The testimony submitted by the Plaintiff’s witnesses, Steven Gardner and Daniel Laviers, was to the effect that the coal in question was mineable and merchantable, as was the coal on the tract not taken by the Plaintiff. The witness for the Plaintiff, appraiser Coby Mosely, offered evidence which would call into question whether the coal on the Defendant’s property was mineable and merchantable.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

God's Center Foundation, Inc. v. Lexington Fayette Urban County Government
125 S.W.3d 295 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 2002)
Commonwealth v. Cooksey
948 S.W.2d 122 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1997)
Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Gov't v. Moore
559 S.W.3d 374 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dlx, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Department of Highways, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dlx-inc-v-commonwealth-of-kentucky-transportation-cabinet-department-of-kyctapp-2022.