This morning, the Federal Circuit released a precedential opinion in a takings case that attracted an amicus brief. In the opinion, the court held in part that “the trial court properly applied the stabilization doctrine to this case and did not clearly err” in determining the timing of when the taking accrued. The court, however, vacated the trial court’s denial of crop damages and its finding that the government did not causally contribute to certain flooding and remanded the case. In addition, this morning the court also released an erratum. Here is the introduction to the opinion and a link to the erratum.

Ideker Farms, Inc. v. United States (Precedential)

Plaintiffs brought this action against the United States under the Fifth Amendment seeking compensation for the Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) alleged taking of their farmlands and personal property by permanent, recurring flooding. The Court of Federal Claims determined there was a taking and entered judgment awarding compensation for the diminished value of the land but rejected damages claims for lost crops. The Government appeals the trial court’s determination that a taking occurred. Plaintiffs cross-appeal the denial of compensation for lost crops. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.