Johnson Propane, Heating & Cooling, Inc. v. the Iowa Department of Transportation, 2017 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 19

Johnson Propane owned a .76-acre parcel in Correctionville; IDOT sought to condemn .16 acres for a highway project, leaving a .60-acre remainder.
IDOT determined the remainder was not an "uneconomical remnant" and filed an application; the chief judge appointed a compensation commission.
The commission received competing appraisals: Johnson Propane’s appraisal valued the whole parcel at $200,000 and argued the remainder was unusable for its propane business; IDOT’s appraisal valued the whole at $78,400 and the remainder at $66,900.
The compensation commission awarded $11,100 for the .16-acre taking.
Johnson Propane appealed the commission’s damages determination to district court (filed notice Nov. 21, petition Nov. 25), asserting the taking left an uneconomical remnant and sought $200,000 (fair market value of whole).
IDOT moved for summary judgment arguing Johnson Propane’s challenge to the agency’s determination about an uneconomical remnant was untimely under Iowa Code § 6A.24(1); the district court granted summary judgment and dismissed the petition as untimely.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Johnson Propane’s claim that the taking left an "uneconomical remnant" could be raised on appeal from the compensation commission’s damages award	Johnson Propane argued the appeal of the commission’s damages award could include a claim that the taking left an uneconomical remnant and thus the whole parcel should have been condemned (seeking full fair-market value).	IDOT argued a challenge to the agency’s determination that the remainder is not an uneconomical remnant is a challenge to eminent-domain authority that must be filed as a separate action within 30 days of the notice of assessment under § 6A.24(1); it is not properly raised on a damages appeal.	Held: The uneconomical-remnant claim must be brought as a separate § 6A.24(1) action within 30 days of the notice; Johnson Propane’s filing was untimely, so the district court lacked authority to hear it.

Sanon v. City of Pella, 865 N.W.2d 506 (Iowa 2015) (standard of review for summary judgment and statutory interpretation)
Townsend v. Mid-Am. Pipeline Co., 168 N.W.2d 30 (Iowa 1969) (measure of damages in partial takings: difference between pre- and post-taking fair market value)
State ex rel. Iowa State Highway Comm’n v. Read, 228 N.W.2d 199 (Iowa 1975) (appeal from compensation commission limited to amount of damages)
In re Prop. Seized for Forfeiture from Williams, 676 N.W.2d 607 (Iowa 2004) (failure to timely file an action can deprive a court of authority)