Free Notice of Indirectly Related Case(s) - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 691.5 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 684 Words, 4,301 Characters
Page Size: 611.76 x 791.76 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/22204/43.pdf

Download Notice of Indirectly Related Case(s) - District Court of Federal Claims ( 691.5 kB)


Preview Notice of Indirectly Related Case(s) - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:07-cv-00273-MCW

Document 43

Filed 04/05/2008

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
STEPHEN J. ROGERS, et. al.
)

) Plaintiffs,
v.

)
)

Hon. Mary Ellen Coster Williams

TINITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Defendant.

)
) )

)

No.07-273

) ) and ) ) BIRD BAY EXECUTIVE GOLF COURSE,INC, ) et al. ) ) Plaintiffs. )

)
V.

Hon. Mary Ellen Coster Williams

)
)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)
)

No. 07426

Defendant.

)

)

PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE PF IIIDIRECTLY RELATED CASE PT'RSUAIIT TO RCFC 40.2ft)
COMENOWPlaintiffs,pursuantto RCFC40.2(b), and in supportoftheirNotice oflndirectly
Related Case, hereby state as follows:

1.

Pursuant to the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"), Rule

40.2(b), "Whenever it appears to a party that there are two or more cases before the court that present

coillmon issues of facts and that transfer, consolidation, or the adoption of a coordinated discovery
schedule would significantly promote the effrcient administration of justice, the party may

file

a

STLDOCS 209615v1

Case 1:07-cv-00273-MCW

Document 43

Filed 04/05/2008

Page 2 of 3

Notice of Indirectly Related Cases(s)."

Bird Bav v. United States.Bav Plaza Prooerties, LLC v. United States"and,thelmmediateCase Present Common Issues of Law and Fact on the Issue of the Government's Liabilitv.

2.

The recently filed. Bay Plaza Properties, LLC, et al. v. United States,08-198, is

a

claim

brought pursuant to the Fifth Amendment and the Tucker Act by thirty-trvo owners of property in
Sarasota County, Florida seeking'Just compensation" for the property taken from them when the abandoned Sarasota County railroad easement was converted to interim trail use and preserved for possible reactivation as a railroad corridor under Section 8(d) ofthe 1983 amendments to the National

Trails System Act, 16 U.S.C. $ 1247(d) ("Trails Act").

3.

The named Plaintiffs in Bay Plaza are the owners of thirty-seven parcels ofproperty in

Sarasota County, Florida and they have chosen to not participate as an opt-in class member in this
case, but to rather proceed separately tn Bay Plaza as a non-class action proceeding.

4.

While the Plaintiffs' properties inBay Plazapresentunique issues related to assessing

the particular damages each Plaintiffhas suffered by reason of this taking, they share common issues on the threshold question of the government's

liability with those presently before the court

in

Rogers

andBird Bay.

5.

The Bay Plaza Plaintiffs desire to have this matter resolved in a prompt and cost

efficient manner and consolidation of this action with the pending Roge rs and Bird Bal cases should
not delay the resolution of Bird Bay or Rogers and resolution of this action.

will provide for the prompt and cost-efficient

6.

Consolidating Bay Plaza with Rogers and Bird Bay for resolution of the common

issues of Florida law and fact related to determination of the federal government's

liability for

a

STLDOCS 209615v1

Case 1:07-cv-00273-MCW

Document 43

Filed 04/05/2008

Page 3 of 3

taking of the property interests will serve the interest of efficient and cost-effective administration

of

justice and substantially reduce the costs and expenses in both cases and conservejudicial resources.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs request that, pursuant to RCFC 40.2(b), Bay Plaza Properties,

LLCv. United

States, No. 08-198,Rogers v. United Stales,No. A7-273,andBird Bayv. UnitedStates, a

No. 07-426 be consolidated for resolution of the common issues of law and fact related to

determination of whether the federal govenrment is obligated to pay the Plaintiff property owners

'Just compensation" for a taking of their properly when an easement for interim public-access
recreational trail use and an easement for the possible reactivation as a future railroad corridor was
created by operation of the Trails Act and the STB's issuance of a NITU on

April 2,204.

Respectfu lly submitted,

LATHROP & GAGE, L.C.

Date: April5,2008

/s/ Mark F. (."Thor") Hearne. II Ma.m F. ("THoR") HraRNE, II

Lnrosev S.C. BnrNroN MecrmN S. LenceNr The Equitable Building
10 South Broadway, Suite 1300

St. Louis, MO 63102-1708 Telephone: (3 14) 613-2500

Facsimile: (314) 613-2550
[email protected]. com

Attorney for Plaintiffs

STLDOCS 209615v1