Opinion ID: 2157911
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: appeal: the city's remaining assignments of error are without merit

Text: We have considered the city's remaining assignments of error, and we conclude they are without merit. CROSS-APPEAL: THE DISTRICT COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY DENYING REALTY TRUST AN AWARD OF ATTORNEY AND EXPERT WITNESS FEES In its cross-appeal, Realty Trust assigns as error the district court's refusal to award Realty Trust its attorney and expert witness fees. Pursuant to § 76-720, when both parties object to the award of the appraisers and the final judgment is greater in any amount than the award, the court may in its discretion award to the condemnee a reasonable sum for the fees of his or her attorney and for fees necessarily incurred for not more than two expert witnesses. In this case, both parties objected to the award of the appraisers, and the district court's judgment exceeded the appraisers' award. We have reviewed the record and note that the instant case was subject to considerable pretrial activity; the trial lasted 2 days, including the presentation of numerous witnesses and documentary evidence; and the case was complex. The district court gave no reason for the denial of attorney and expert witness fees. In view of the increase in the final award, Realty Trust was eligible for attorney and expert witness fees under § 76-720. Given the record presented on appeal, we conclude the district court abused its discretion in failing to award Realty Trust the fees for its attorney and up to two expert witnesses. Accordingly, we reverse that portion of the district court's order that denied Realty Trust its attorney and expert witness fees and remand the cause with directions to award Realty Trust a reasonable sum for its attorney fees and for the fees necessarily incurred by up to two of its expert witnesses.