Coleman v. Mississippi Transportation Commission
159 So. 3d 546
| Miss. | 2015Background
- MTC sought to condemn 18.61 acres of Lavon Coleman’s land for I-269 and, before filing suit, had appraiser William Milton value the property at $380,300 and sent an offer based on that appraisal.
- MTC filed an eminent-domain complaint on September 17, 2010, obtained quick possession, and a court-appointed appraiser later returned a valuation of $288,455; Milton reappraised at $289,400 after the court appraisal.
- MTC deposited a “quick-take” sum with the court (around $381,300); Coleman later withdrew $380,300 from that deposit.
- At trial, the court excluded evidence and cross-examination about Milton’s pre-filing $380,300 appraisal and the quick-take deposit as impermissible settlement evidence under Rule 408, and limited valuation evidence to the post-filing $289,400 figure.
- Coleman’s valuation expert was excluded under Rule 702 for inadequate methodology; after exclusion, the trial court granted MTC a directed verdict for $289,400.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court found exclusion of Milton’s earlier appraisal (and cross-examination about it) was reversible error and reversed and remanded, permitting such evidence subject to ordinary relevance and Rule 403 limits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of MTC’s pre-filing appraisal, quick-take deposit, and cross-examination about them | Coleman argued the pre-filing appraisal and related facts are relevant impeachment and substantive evidence of value and not settlement communications barred by Rule 408 | MTC argued the appraisal/deposit were offers/settlement communications and thus inadmissible under Rule 408 | Court held the pre-filing appraisal is admissible (Rule 408 inapplicable to appraisals here); exclusion of that appraisal and related cross-exam was reversible error; deposit/offer likewise not automatically excluded but may be limited under Rule 403 |
| Grant of directed verdict for MTC | Coleman argued exclusion of the pre-filing appraisal and prohibition of cross-exam deprived her of evidence creating jury questions on value | MTC argued its prima facie case shifted burden to Coleman, and with her expert excluded there was no proof to rebut $289,400 | Court held directed verdict improper because improperly excluded evidence could have produced a jury question; remanded for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Morley v. Jackson Redevelopment Authority, 632 So.2d 1284 (Miss. 1994) (trial court erred excluding condemnor's earlier higher appraisal; such appraisal may be used for impeachment and to show valuation discrepancies)
- Ellis v. Mississippi State Highway Comm'n, 487 So.2d 1339 (Miss. 1986) (condemnor bears burden to prove value; once prima facie established, landowner must present evidence to receive greater compensation)
- United States v. 320.0 Acres of Land, 605 F.2d 762 (5th Cir. 1979) (pre-filing agency appraisal not excluded by federal counterpart to Rule 408; admissible for impeachment and as admission against interest)
- Gulf South Pipeline v. Pitre, 35 So.3d 494 (Miss. 2010) (discusses burden-shifting after condemnor makes prima facie case)