A hypothetical or speculative use of property is not a proper basis for determining damages caused by a city's temporary construction easement, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.
The unanimous three-judge appellate panel overturned a jury's decision to award a Fremont homeowner $195,000 in temporary severance damages. The First District ruled that the trial court judge improperly permitted the jury to consider compensation for hypothetical — rather than actual — injuries.
