The Utah Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court ruling that a condemnee could not seek damages for potential highest and best uses of property if that use has not already been initiated prior to the commencement of condemnation proceedings. In Rocky Mt. Power, Inc. v. Marriott, the condemning authority, Rocky Mountain Power, asked the district court to exclude damages evidence relating to the condemnees’ ability to relocate utility lines and to obtain certain mining permits, which would dramatically impact the property owners’ right to seek just compensation. The district court granted the motion. However, the Utah Court of Appeals unanimously reversed that ruling. In so doing, the Court explained: “When a legal barrier prevents a proposed ‘highest and best use,’ the ability to remove that barrier will always be uncertain to some degree. But a landowner need not show that a legal barrier will certainly be removed, he must show only that its removal is reasonably probable.” The Court further explained: “Fair market value is not determined ‘by taking a temporal snapshot of the land’s value according to its use at’ the date of the condemnation. Instead, the calculation is ‘based upon the highest and best use’ to which the land could have been put at that time.” (Emphasis added). This ruling is an important victory for private property owners in the State of Utah facing the threat of eminent domain. Steven J. Joffee, and his former partner at his previous law firm, litigated the appeal on behalf of the property owners. A copy of the Utah Court of Appeals opinion can be found here: https://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/appopin/Rocky%20Mountain%20%20v.%20Marriott20181129_20160956_221.pdf