 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Owens v. City of Phoenix11/15/1994
JACOBSON, Judge
The main issue presented by this appeal is when a cause of action accrues, for the purpose of commencing the running of statutes of limitations, in a suit seeking city relocation assistance and payments after the City of Phoenix (City) purchased the condemned property.
Thomas J. Owens (Owens) brought an action against the City seeking relocation expenses, damages for negligence, and damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ( § 1983). The trial court ruled that the claims were barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. The trial court also held that Owens had failed to state a claim under § 1983. Summary judgment was entered in favor of the City, and Owens timely appealed. We reverse.
The City cross-appeals from the trial court's ruling that Owens' lawsuit was not barred by a failure to exhaust his administrative remedies or by the doctrine of res judicata. We affirm the trial court's rulings on the cross-appeal.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Owens owned real property at 1708-1712 East Mohave in Phoenix that he used for non-residential business purposes (the "business property" or "displacement property"). The business property was acquired by the City as part of its West Approach Land Acquisition Project (the "WALA Project"), in which the City acquired a block of land west of Sky Harbor International Airport. As a result of the acquisition, Owens was entitled to relocation payments and assistance for the move of his equipment and other personal property from the displacement property to his new business site (or "replacement property") pursuant to both the Uniform Relocation Assistance Act (the "Federal Relocation Act"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 4601 through 4655, and the Arizona Relocation Act, A.R.S. §§ 11-961 through 11-974.
The City began negotiating with Owens for the purchase of his business property on July 10, 1985. On August 13, 1985, the City sent Owens a "Determination Letter," which indicated that he might be eligible for the following relocation benefits:
1. Actual reasonable moving and related expenses in an amount to be determined upon submission of appropriate documentation, and site search expenses of up to $500; or
2. An in lieu payment of $2,500 to $10,000, with the amount to be determined upon submission of documentation establishing eligibility for an in lieu payment.
Although the Determination Letter provided that eligibility for these relocation benefits was dependent upon Owens' "timely submission of required documentation," it did not specify the documents needed, nor did it indicate a deadline for their submission. The Determination Letter stated that July 10, 1985 (the date on which the negotiations for the purchase of the business property began) constituted Owens' "eligibility date" for relocation assistance. The letter further provided that "any appeal must be filed and/or requested within 30 days of the receipt of this letter to be valid." Owens did not file an appeal in response to the Determination Letter.
On May 13, 1987, while the parties were still negotiating the purchase of Owens' business property, Owens filed a complaint against the City in Maricopa County Superior Court (the "1987 Complaint"), alleging claims on behalf of both himself individually and as part of a class action. Owens' individual claims focused on his residential property, which was also being acquired by the City as part of the WALA Project. The class action was brought on behalf of the following parties:
All current owners, and all previous owners who have sold property within the described area to the city, since t
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Arizona Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|