Department of Transp. v. Revco Disc. Drug Ctrs. Inc.

The plaintiff's intervention in the direct condemnation action and the dismissal of the plaintiff's inverse condemnation action with prejudice constituted a judgment on the merits for purposes of res judicata, barring the plaintiff's claim for condemnation damages in the present action.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The Department of Transportation “DOT” filed a petition for condemnation and a declaration of taking to acquire 0.144 acres of land, along with certain easement rights, on certain property located in Atlanta. Revco Discount Drug Centers, Inc. “Revco”, which was not named as a condemnee in the direct condemnation action, filed a separate action against DOT for inverse condemnation. Acting upon an agreement of the parties and an order of the trial court, Revco intervened in the direct condemnation action and dismissed its inverse condemnation action “with prejudice.” DOT then moved for summary judgment, contending that Revco’s dismissal of its inverse condemnation action with prejudice constituted an adjudication on the merits which barred Revco’s claim for the same damages in the direct condemnation action. The trial court denied Revco’s petition to set aside the dismissal with prejudice and denied DOT’s motion for summary judgment, and the case proceeded to a jury trial. After a verdict and judgment was entered in favor of Revco, DOT filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or new trial, which the trial court denied. DOT appeals from the judgment and the denial of its motion for j.n.o.v., contending that the trial erred in failing to apply res judicata and that the trial court made various errors at trial. For the following reasons, we reverse in part and vacate in part.

1. DOT contends that the trial court erred in failing to apply res judicata to bar Revco’s claim for damages arising from the condemnation. In light of the trial court’s denial of the petition to set aside the dismissal with prejudice and based upon the controlling authority set forth herein, we are, unfortunately, constrained to agree.

Department of Transp. v. Revco Disc. Drug Ctrs. Inc.

The plaintiff's intervention in the direct condemnation action and the dismissal of the plaintiff's inverse condemnation action with prejudice constituted a judgment on the merits for purposes of res judicata, barring the plaintiff's claim for condemnation damages in the present action.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report