Richard W. BLY; Patsy A. Bly; and Bank of the West, F/N/A/ Community First National Bank, F/N/A the Bank, N.A…

Summary

The Supreme Court of Colorado, en banc, affirmed the court of appeals in this private condemnation action, holding that a petition under section 38-1-102(1), C.R.S., must give a general description of the property and its purpose but need not contain a metes and bounds legal description or specify the particular intended uses; a petition seeking a twenty-foot easement over an existing driveway as a 'private way of necessity' was therefore adequate, and a later-supplied metes and bounds description cured any locational uncertainty. The Court also held that although the trial court should have admitted the condemnees' cost-of-construction valuation evidence, its exclusion was not an abuse of discretion because the error did not, with fair assurance, substantially influence the jury's $3,300 award or impair the basic fairness of the trial. Justice Eid, joined by Justice Rice, concurred in the dismissal holding but dissented from the evidentiary holding, arguing that limiting the jury to the comparable sales method where no comparable driveway-easement sales existed was an abuse of discretion.