## Facts

- St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District (the Port), a state-operated public port in Louisiana, sought to acquire riverfront property owned by Violet Dock Port, Inc. (Violet).
- After years of unsuccessful negotiations, the Port filed an expropriation proceeding in 2010 to take approximately 75 acres of industrial land on the Mississippi River.
- The property included waterfront improvements configured for Violet’s main operation: layberthing of oceangoing vessels, along with limited cargo-related activities.
- Violet held a contract with the United States Navy to layberth and service oceangoing ships at the facility.
- In the trial court, the parties presented competing valuation testimony on (a) the property’s highest and best use and (b) which appraisal methodology should control valuation.
- The Port’s valuation evidence focused on fair market value using market-based techniques and treated the property’s highest and best use as consistent with the market for industrial riverfront land and facilities.
- Violet’s valuation evidence argued that the property’s improvements and operational utility supported a higher value, urging approaches that gave weight to the facility’s specialized nature (including cost-based or income-related considerations).
- The trial court approved the taking and set just compensation at $16 million, explaining that it believed it had to accept one side’s valuation and could not combine parts of the competing opinions.
- The Louisiana Supreme Court later held the expropriation was authorized but found the trial court committed legal error by treating valuation as an all-or-nothing choice between experts; it remanded to the Louisiana Fourth Circuit to determine just compensation de novo from the existing record.
- This 2018 decision is the Fourth Circuit’s post-remand opinion addressing only the amount of just compensation.

## Issues

1. After the Supreme Court found legal error in the trial court’s valuation approach, what amount of just compensation should be awarded for the expropriated port property based on a de novo review of the record?
2. In fixing compensation, may the reviewing court weigh and combine credible portions of competing valuation opinions rather than adopting one appraisal methodology in full?

## Decision

- The court conducted a de novo review of the record, as directed, because the trial court’s valuation determination rested on legal error.
- The court rejected the premise that the factfinder had to select one side’s valuation opinion in its entirety.
- The court reviewed and weighed the competing evidence on highest and best use (including whether the market supported a layberthing-focused use or a cargo-terminal-focused use) and on valuation methodology (market, cost, and income-related evidence).
- Applying Louisiana’s constitutional requirement of just compensation, the court recalculated the award from the record evidence and amended the trial court’s compensation determination rather than leaving the $16 million figure in place.

## Legal Principles

- When a valuation judgment is based on legal error, the appellate court may make an independent determination of just compensation on the existing record.
- In expropriation cases, just compensation is tied to the owner’s loss as measured through valuation standards that center on fair market value, informed by the property’s highest and best use at the time of the taking.
- A factfinder is not required to accept one appraiser’s opinion wholesale; it may accept or reject parts of competing opinions and reach a value supported by the record.
- Highest and best use must be supported by evidence of legal permissibility, physical possibility, and market demand, not solely by the owner’s preferred use.
- Evidence about specialized improvements and existing operations may be relevant to market value, but compensation is not automatically increased to match owner-specific business expectations independent of market valuation.

## Conclusion

On remand from the Louisiana Supreme Court, the Louisiana Fourth Circuit re-determined just compensation de novo for the Port’s taking of Violet’s 75-acre riverfront facility, rejecting the trial court’s view that it had to choose one side’s appraisal in full and instead weighing the competing valuation evidence to set a revised compensation award.


St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District v. Violet Dock Port, Inc., 255 So. 3d 57 (2018)