Court Opinion

ID: 9519976
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:28:40.39521+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:45:25.255652
License: Public Domain

PRESIDING JUSTICE COOK, dissenting: I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the condemnation award and dismiss the petition to condemn because of plaintiffs failure to make a bona fide offer prior to instituting these proceedings. The power of the government to take the private property of an individual is a tremendous power, one capable of great abuse. The legislature has seen fit to limit that power by requiring that the taking body attempt to seek the agreement of the parties prior to commencing a condemnation action. 735 ILCS 5/7 — 102 (West 1998). The taking body is required to make a bona fide offer prior to commencing the action. City of Chicago v. Harrison-Halsted Building Corp., 11 Ill 2d 431, 434, 143 N.E.2d 40, 43 (1957). The taking body does not have the option of “playing hardball.” The taking body may not wait to see whether defendant is willing to hire attorneys, engage experts, and defend a condemnation action before it places its offer on the table. In this case, plaintiffs corporation counsel, by letter dated August 7, 1997, offered the amount of $200, based on the appraisal of Wayne Briggs. After initiating condemnation proceedings, plaintiff abandoned Briggs and submitted the appraisal of Randy Johnson, who testified at trial that the property was worth $31,500. Plaintiff makes two arguments in this court, first that the $200 offer was a bona fide offer to which defendants never responded, and second, that the $31,500 was offered prior to trial. Whatever method Briggs used to compute the $200 value, even if that figure was not suggested to him by plaintiff, the $200 offer clearly was not a bona fide offer in this case. On the second issue, it is not sufficient that a bona fide offer is made before trial. The law is clear that a bona fide offer is a precondition to the filing of the suit. Harrison-Halsted, 11 Ill. 2d at 434, 143 N.E.2d at 43. The majority apparently recognizes that a bona fide offer was not made in this case but avoids the issue by complaints about the adequacy of the record and the suggestion that defendants have forfeited the issue. Those arguments were never made by plaintiff. It seems clear from the record that (1) a $200 offer was made, (2) defendants objected that there was no bona fide offer prior to initiating the action, and (3) the trial court rejected that argument. Important interests are at stake here. We should not allow plaintiff, or any taking body, to begin these proceedings after making only a token insignificant offer. Because of the failure of a precondition to the initiation of this action, this action must be dismissed.