An Empirical Study of Court-Adjudicated Takings Compensation in New York City: 1990 - 2003
Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Forthcoming
34 Pages Posted: 28 Apr 2009 Last revised: 15 Jan 2011
Date Written: July 24, 2009
No empirical study on court-adjudicated condemnation compensation has been done in the past thirty years. To fill in the empirical gap, I first collect condemnation compensation cases in New York City between 1990 and 2003, finding that the court usually rules in favor of condemnors. In addition, I use hedonic regression models and about 7,500 sales to estimate the fair market value (FMV) of 27 condemned properties and compare the FMV with condemnors’ offered value, condemnees’ claimed value, and court awards, finding that all but one condemnees’ claims are above FMV while a majority of condemnors’ offers and court awards are above FMV; moreover, condemnors’ claims come closer to FMV than condemnees’ claims and court awards. The court usually favors condemnors because condemnors have better incentives to produce unbiased assessed value and condemnors’ offered value actually is closer to FMV. Offers, claims, and awards are inaccurate because bias-prone and subjective appraisal techniques are used to assess property value.
Keywords: Hedonic regression model, New York City, fair market value, condemnation, appraisal
JEL Classification: K11
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation