Briggs v. City of Palmer
333 P.3d 746
Alaska2014Background
- Briggs owned two parcels adjacent to Palmer Airport and alleged inverse condemnation due to airport noise/pollution diminishing his property value.
- Palmer annexed Briggs’s property into its corporate boundaries after prior complaints of taking.
- In 2007 Briggs filed suit alleging that noise substantially interfered with use and enjoyment, diminishing value.
- At pretrial, Briggs stated he would not call expert witnesses and claimed owners may testify to value.
- Superior Court granted Palmer summary judgment for lack of admissible damages evidence, citing Briggs’s lack of valuation expertise.
- Briggs, proceeding pro se after counsel withdrew, appealed; the appeal was filed Dec. 3, 2012, and deemed timely for good cause despite late filing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Briggs’s late appeal may be accepted. | Briggs, pro se, misunderstood procedure; good cause. | Palmer argues the appeal is untimely and not tolled. | Yes; the court accepts the appeal for good cause. |
| Whether a property owner may testify about diminution in value before and after a taking. | Owner may testify about market value; Briggs. | Damages require expert testimony; value should be proven by experts. | Yes; lay testimony by the owner on pre/post-taking value is admissible; reverses summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wernberg v. Matanuska Elec. Ass’n, 494 P.2d 790 (Alaska 1972) (owner may testify as to market value; damage evidence may require expert testimony in some contexts)
- Fairbanks North Star Borough v. Lakeview Enters., Inc., 897 P.2d 47 (Alaska 1995) (owner's opinion on property value normally admissible)
- Osborne v. Hurst, 947 P.2d 1356 (Alaska 1997) (lay testimony on value before/after damaging events admissible)
- Maddox v. Hardy, 187 P.3d 486 (Alaska 2008) (Alaska allows owner to testify on value before/after damaging event)
- Schymanski v. Conventz, 674 P.2d 281 (Alaska 1983) (cited in context of valuation and damages)
- Toliver v. Alaska State Comm’n for Human Rights, 279 P.3d 619 (Alaska 2012) (procedural citation used for timing in appellate context)