Opinion ID: 2124452
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Action for moving expenses.

Text: This action was brought by National Hardware to recover its moving expenses involved in the relocating of its retail hardware business at another site. The applicable statute provides that such moving expenses of landowner or tenant are compensable, [5] but provides that such costs of removal from nonresidential site shall not exceed $2,000. [6] National Hardware filed two claims for $2,000 each, one for the store building and one for the warehouse. One claim was allowed; the other was not. National Hardware brought suit for the $2,000 claim that was denied, and for the balance of moving expenses not included in the two claims filed. The trial court allowed the $2,000 claim which had previously been denied by the commission, but denied the balance of the moving expenses, including as a ground for so doing the fact that no claim for the balance had been filed with the commission. The procedure for collection of itemized items of compensation in eminent domain cases is prescribed by statute in sec. 32.20, Stats. 1965. [7] The trial court held that any claim for moving expenses must, under this statute, be initially presented to the commission for approval or disapproval. National Hardware sees the statutory procedure as applying only to claims up to $2,000, with claims for additional expenses to go directly to the courts. There is a $2,000 limit as to what is compensable, but that applies to what may be paid out, not to what can be claimed. If there is a claim of entitlement to more than $2,000 or a claim that the $2,000 limit is invalid or inapplicable, it is the entire claim that is to be filed with the commission, not just the first $2,000 of it. Our court has held that, while a notice of claim must claim a definite amount, the fact that the amount exceeds the maximum allowable under a statute does not render the claim invalid. [8] In the case before us, it is only if such claim is filed and disallowed that the claimant shall have a right of action against the condemnor. [9] Since no claim was made to the commission for the balance of moving expenses now claimed (in excess of the $4,000 allowed) and since the two-year time limit for filing such claim has run, [10] both the right and the remedy to make such claim have been extinguished. [11] We affirm the holding of the trial court that a claim must be made to the commission for the entire amount of moving expenses incurred if that entire amount is sought to be recovered in a court action. Here the Rotters are limited to recovery of the two $2,000 claims for which they sought and were awarded compensation.