The South Dakota Supreme Court is considering a case involving an issue frequently in the news lately — eminent domain. However, this case doesn’t involve carbon pipelines.
State V. Gustafson is an eminent domain case orbiting the construction of highways and is reflective of the skepticism some South Dakotans have expressed regarding the practice.
The project in question required the condemnation of lands owned by Charles and Heather Gustafson to rebuild the I-29 interchange with 41st Street in Sioux Falls. That intersection is one of the busiest in the city and a main access point for shopping and other commercial activity.
After the state compensated the family for the property, located at the corner of 41st and Carolyn Avenue, the couple then contended the loss of access to 41st negatively impacts their financial outcomes.
The project resulted in Carolyn Avenue becoming a dead-end cul-de-sac. The family contends this should result in additional compensations, arguing the loss of access to 41st removes high-density retail demand from the property.
In turn the state contends that the couple is not entitled to compensation due to already having control of the access point granted from the prior owners in the late 1950s.
Further, the state points to multiple new access points and argues the couple has no claim over a special right of access to 41st Street.
Despite this, a lower court ruling determined the Gustafsons were indeed entitled to additional compensation due to financial loss and personal property damages.
That compensation is the question in front of the state Supreme Court, which is in deliberations over the case, alongside others heard during the current term of court held at BHSU this week.
A ruling is expected in the coming months.