Utah Easements, Landlocked Property and Eminent Domain Laws

In Utah, a prescriptive easement takes 20 years of use that is open, continuous and adverse under a claim of right, a rule that comes from Utah Supreme Court decisions rather than a general statute (Orton v. Carter, 1998), and the person claiming it must prove it by clear and convincing evidence (Judd v. Bowen, Utah Ct. App. 2017). On the eminent domain side, the Utah Constitution bars taking or damaging private property for public use without just compensation (art. I, § 22), Utah Code § 78B-6-501 lists the public uses for which property may be condemned, and redevelopment agencies may use eminent domain only in the situations Utah Code § 17C-1-902 allows.

This page covers easements between private landowners first, then the government's power to take private property. For other states, see our guide to easement laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-20. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses Utah state law on private easements (prescription, statutory prescriptive easements, recording and relocation) and on the condemnation of private property under the Utah Constitution and Utah Code Title 78B, Chapter 6, Part 5. It does not address adverse possession of title (see Utah squatters rights and adverse possession), HOA covenants, zoning or regulatory takings, federal condemnation (see eminent domain laws by state), or city and county ordinances.

Utah Easement Laws

An easement is a right to use land someone else owns, such as a driveway across a neighbor's lot or a ditch across a farm. In Utah an easement can be created in writing, or it can arise from long use (prescription). Utah statutes also govern recording, two special kinds of prescriptive easements, and when the owner of the burdened land may move an easement.

How long does a prescriptive easement take in Utah?

Twenty years. Utah has no general statute fixing a prescriptive period for easements; the rule comes from the Utah Supreme Court. In Orton v. Carter (1998), the court stated that a prescriptive easement is created when the claimant can prove that "use of another's land was open, continuous, and adverse under a claim of right for a period of twenty years."

The burden is high. The Utah Court of Appeals stated in Judd v. Bowen (2017 UT App 56) that "the claimant must prove by clear and convincing evidence" that the use was open, continuous and adverse under a claim of right for twenty years. The Utah Supreme Court later granted review and then dismissed it as improvidently granted, noting that the standard rested on well-established Utah caselaw (Judd v. Bowen, 2018 UT 47).

Long use also shifts the burden of explanation. In Zollinger v. Frank (1946), the Utah Supreme Court adopted the rule that "where a claimant has shown an open and continuous use of the land for the prescriptive period (20 years in Utah) the use will be presumed to have been against the owner." The court restated the rule in Valcarce v. Fitzgerald (1998): once the claimant shows open and continuous use under a claim of right for twenty years, the use is presumed adverse, and the owner of the burdened land "then has the burden of establishing that the use was initially permissive." The same opinion noted that "the fact that the parties were initially friendly or cordial with one another does not prevent a prescriptive right from arising."

A prescriptive easement is not ownership. It gives a right to use a path or strip of land; it does not transfer title. Taking title by long possession is adverse possession, a different claim under separate Utah statutes with its own period and requirements, covered on our Utah squatters rights and adverse possession page.

Statutory prescriptive easements: water conveyances and livestock trails

Two Utah statutes create prescriptive easements for particular uses, each on a 20-year period:

• Water conveyances. Utah Code § 57-13a-102(1) provides that "a prescriptive easement may be established if a water user has maintained a water conveyance for a period of 20 years during which the use has been: (a) continuous; (b) open and notorious; and (c) adverse." Under subsection (2), if the use was continuous and open and notorious, "there is a rebuttable presumption that the use has been adverse."
• Historical livestock trails. Utah Code § 57-13b-201(1) allows a prescriptive easement where "a property owner uses an historical livestock trail that crosses another person's property for a period of 20 years," where the use was continuous, open and notorious, and adverse (with a rebuttable presumption of adverseness once continuous, open and notorious use is shown). Such an easement "may only be established on private lands" (§ 57-13b-201(1)-(3)).

Landlocked property and access roads in Utah

Utah's eminent domain statute does not set up a separate private way-of-necessity procedure in sections 78B-6-501 through 78B-6-503. Instead, the statute's list of public uses includes "byroads leading from a highway to: (i) a residence; or (ii) a farm" (Utah Code § 78B-6-501(2)(g)). A byroad taking is still a condemnation, so it must meet the general conditions for any taking in § 78B-6-504 described below and must pay just compensation.

Utah courts also recognize easements implied by law. The Utah Supreme Court has explained that "a way of necessity arises when there is a conveyance of part of a tract of land which is so situated that either the part conveyed or the part retained is surrounded with no access to a road to the outer world," and that a way across the other part is then implied "unless it clearly appears that the parties to the conveyance did not intend such an easement" (Tschaggeny v. Union Pacific Land Resources Corp., 1976). The necessity must arise from the division of a single owner's land.

An easement can also be implied from an earlier owner's use. The Utah Court of Appeals lists four elements: "(1) unity of title followed by severance; (2) at the time of severance the servitude was apparent, obvious, and visible; (3) the easement is reasonably necessary to enjoy the dominant estate; and (4) use of the easement was continuous rather than sporadic" (Potter v. Chadaz, 1999). In the same case the court rejected an easement by necessity because the property was "not landlocked" and had other access routes.

Creating and recording an express easement

An express easement is one granted or reserved in writing. Utah's statute of frauds provides that "no estate or interest in real property, other than leases for a term not exceeding one year," shall be "created, granted, assigned, surrendered or declared otherwise than by act or operation of law, or by deed or conveyance in writing subscribed by the party creating, granting, assigning, surrendering or declaring the same, or by that party's lawful agent thereunto authorized by writing" (Utah Code § 25-5-1). The same rule covers surrendering an interest, so a voluntary release of an easement is made by a signed writing; our Utah quitclaim deed guide explains how deeds are signed and recorded.

Recording matters to later buyers. A document executed, acknowledged and certified as Title 57 prescribes shall, "from the time of recording with the appropriate county recorder, impart notice to all persons of their contents" (Utah Code § 57-3-102(1)). Our Utah property records guide explains how to search county recorder records for easements on a parcel.

Moving an easement: Utah's Uniform Easement Relocation Act

Utah adopted the Uniform Easement Relocation Act in 2022 (Utah Code Title 57, Chapter 13c). It applies to an easement established "by express grant or reservation" or "by prescription, implication, necessity, estoppel, or other method" (§ 57-13c-102(1)), including easements created before, on or after May 4, 2022 (§ 57-13c-113).

The act cannot be used to relocate "a conservation easement, a negative easement, a public-entity easement, a public-utility easement, or a water-conveyance easement," or "any easement associated in any way with a highway or a public transit facility," among other exclusions in § 57-13c-102(2). It also "does not apply to relocation of an easement by consent" (§ 57-13c-102(3)).

The servient estate owner (the owner of the burdened land) may relocate an easement under the act "only if the relocation does not materially" do any of the things § 57-13c-103 lists, including "(1) lessen the utility of the easement," "(2) after the relocation, increase the burden on the easement holder in the easement holder's reasonable use and enjoyment of the easement," or "(3) impair an affirmative, easement-related purpose for which the easement was created." The servient owner "is responsible for reasonable expenses of relocation," including construction of improvements and liability the easement holder incurs because of the relocation, with reasonable attorney fees tied to that liability (§ 57-13c-106).

Relocation under the act is not self-help. "To obtain an order to relocate an easement under this chapter, a servient estate owner shall commence a civil action" and serve the easement holder, any security-interest holder of record, any lessee of record of the dominant estate and certain other recorded interest holders (§ 57-13c-104). The court may approve the move only if the easement is eligible and the section 103 conditions are met, and before relocating the servient owner must record a certified copy of the court's order or, if the easement was created by a recorded subdivision or condominium plat, an amended plat (§ 57-13c-105).

How a Utah easement ends

A written release is a surrender of an interest in real property, so it falls under the writing requirement of Utah Code § 25-5-1, and recording the release gives notice under § 57-3-102. An easement can also be abandoned, but the Utah Supreme Court has said that "a right gained by conveyance may not be lost by non-use alone and that an actual intent to abandon be evident" (Western Gateway Storage Co. v. Treseder, 1977). Utah's Marketable Record Title Act may not be applied to "extinguish an easement or interest in the nature of an easement, the existence of which is clearly observable by physical evidence of its use" (Utah Code § 57-9-6(3)).

Private roads that become public by use

A road can become public through public use. "A highway is dedicated and abandoned to the use of the public when it has been continuously used as a public thoroughfare for a period of 10 years" (Utah Code § 72-5-104(2)), creating a right-of-way held by the state or a local highway authority (§ 72-5-104(8)). The statute treats the use as interrupted only when the owner gives at least 72 hours' advance written notice to the highway authority and takes an overt act reasonably calculated to interrupt the public's regular use for at least 24 hours; gates and no-trespassing signs are evidence but "are not solely determinative" (§ 72-5-104(4)-(5)). An interruption restarts the 10-year period only where the 10 years have not already run (§ 72-5-104(6)).

Eminent Domain in Utah

Eminent domain is the government's power to take private property for public use on payment of just compensation. For how other states compare, see our guide to eminent domain laws by state.

Utah's takings clause covers damage as well as taking. Article I, section 22 of the Utah Constitution provides: "Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation." The compensation statute follows that wording by requiring an assessment of damages where property, "though no part of it is taken, will be damaged by the construction of the proposed improvement" (Utah Code § 78B-6-511(1)(c)).

In Kelo v. City of New London (2005), the U.S. Supreme Court held that takings carried out under New London's development plan served a public purpose and satisfied the Fifth Amendment's public use requirement, while emphasizing that "nothing in our opinion precludes any State from placing further restrictions on its exercise of the takings power." Federal law also conditions federal financial assistance on an acquiring agency's assurance that it will be guided, "to the greatest extent practicable under State law," by the federal land acquisition policies (42 U.S.C. § 4655(a)). Our national eminent domain guide covers federal condemnation and relocation law.

What can Utah take property for?

Utah Code § 78B-6-501(2) lists the public uses for which "the right of eminent domain may be exercised," subject to the exceptions in subsections (3), (4) and (5). The list includes byroads to a residence or farm, "gas, oil or coal pipelines," and "telecommunications, electric light and electric power lines," among many others. Subsection (3) bars eminent domain for "trails, paths, or other ways for walking, hiking, bicycling, equestrian use, or other recreational uses," except as subsection (2)(c)(iv) provides. It also bars takings for a public park whose primary purpose is a trail, and for a public park on a century farm (farmland-assessed land held by the same family for 100 years or more) in a county of the first class (§ 78B-6-501(1)(a), (3)(b)). Subsection (4) limits takings in migratory bird production areas, and subsection (5) bars a private person from condemning property already in mining use for a mining use.

Before property can be taken, "it must appear that" (Utah Code § 78B-6-504(2)):

• "(a) the use to which it is to be applied is a use authorized by law;"
• "(b) the taking is necessary for the use;"
• "(c) construction and use of all property sought to be condemned will commence within a reasonable time as determined by the court, after the initiation of proceedings under this part;" and
• "(d) if already appropriated to some public use, the public use to which it is to be applied is a more necessary public use."

A political subdivision may not take property "unless the governing body of the political subdivision approves the taking" (§ 78B-6-504(3)). A person filing an eminent domain action for a high voltage power line must complete an infrastructure siting analysis, demonstrate that use of federal public lands "is not authorized, feasible, or would result in greater public harm than the proposed condemnation," and submit the analysis to the court (§ 78B-6-504(5)).

Can Utah take property for a private developer?

Utah's specific limit on redevelopment takings applies to the agencies governed by Utah Code Title 17C. Utah Code § 17C-1-902(1) provides that "except as provided in Subsection (2), an agency may not use eminent domain to acquire property." Subsection (2) allows it in listed situations, such as "within an urban renewal project area if" the agency board makes a development impediment determination, subject to the other conditions of that part. A separate provision states that an agency that levies property tax "may not use eminent domain to acquire property for agency-wide project development," though it may still use eminent domain for an urban renewal or community reinvestment project area under Part 9 (§ 17C-1-1004(3)).

Even where § 17C-1-902 allows it, an agency may not sue to take owner-occupied residential property unless owners of at least 80% of the owner-occupied residential property in the relevant area, representing at least 70% of its value, petition for it (or 90% of the property owners in the project area do), and at least two-thirds of the board votes in favor; owner-occupied commercial property requires a petition of owners of at least 75% of the commercial property representing at least 60% of its value, plus the same two-thirds vote (§ 17C-1-904(2)-(3)). Before suing, the agency must negotiate in good faith and give the owner a written declaration explaining the process, the independent appraisal and relocation rights (§ 17C-1-903(1)), and the owner may elect fair market value or replacement property (§ 17C-1-903(4)).

For other condemnors, the question is whether the taking fits a public use listed in § 78B-6-501 and meets the necessity and timing requirements of § 78B-6-504.

What must happen before a Utah condemnation lawsuit?

Utah requires negotiation and disclosure before a case is filed:

• Negotiation. A political subdivision seeking to acquire property by eminent domain must, before its governing body takes a final vote to approve filing, "make a reasonable effort to negotiate with the fee simple owner for the purchase of the property" (Utah Code § 78B-6-505(2)(a)).
• Meeting notice. Before the final vote, the political subdivision must give each owner written notice of each governing-body meeting at which a vote on the taking is expected and an opportunity to be heard; mailing the notice to the assessor-record address at least 10 business days before the meeting satisfies the requirement (§ 78B-6-504(4)).
• Property Rights Ombudsman materials. Except as subsection (5) provides, no later than 14 days before that final vote, the political subdivision must give the fee simple owner and each claimant a complete printed copy of the materials on the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman website (§ 78B-6-505(2)(b)).
• Thirty-day wait. Except as subsection (5) provides, "the entity involved in the acquisition of property may not bring a legal action to acquire the property under this chapter until 30 days after" the disclosure and materials are provided (§ 78B-6-505(3)).
• Other condemnors. A condemnor that is not a political subdivision, such as a utility, must also try to negotiate and give the owner the Ombudsman materials and written disclosures no later than 30 days before it files (§ 78B-6-505(4)). A court may shorten the 14-day or 30-day periods on a showing of exigent circumstances and good cause (§ 78B-6-505(5)).
• Appraisal first. An agency with condemnation power must make "every reasonable effort" to acquire property "expeditiously" by negotiation, and the property "shall be appraised before the initiation of negotiations," with the owner or the owner's representative given "an opportunity to accompany the appraiser during his inspection of the property" (Utah Code § 57-12-13(2)). The offer may not be "less than the lowest approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property," the owner must receive a written statement summarizing its basis, and if a partial taking would leave an uneconomic remnant, the agency must offer to buy the whole property (§ 57-12-13(2)(c), (i)).

An owner may also take a dispute with a condemner, or "a dispute over the taking of private property for a public use without the prior use of eminent domain," to the Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman for mediation or arbitration (Utah Code § 78B-6-522(1)). Ombudsman arbitration is not required before going to court (§ 13-43-204(3)(f)). Unless the parties agreed in advance that the arbitration would be binding, any party may take the dispute to district court for trial de novo within 30 days after the arbitrator issues a final award (§ 13-43-204(3)(e), (i)). A request does not stop an occupancy order (§ 78B-6-522(2)), and the mediator or arbitrator may order an additional independent appraisal and require the condemnor to pay for the first one (§ 78B-6-522(4)).

Early occupancy and interest

A condemnor can ask the court for occupancy while the case is pending. If the motion is granted, the condemnor must, "as a condition precedent to occupancy," deposit with the court clerk "a sum equal to the condemning authority's appraised valuation of the property" (Utah Code § 78B-6-510(3)(a)). Section 78B-6-510(5)(c) provides for interest at 8% per year on the amount finally awarded for the property and damages, running from the earlier of the date the condemnor took actual possession or the date of the occupancy order to the date of judgment, as that subsection sets out, except that the court "may not award interest on the amount of the judgment that was paid into court" (§ 78B-6-510(5)(c)(ii)).

The court fixes the time within which, and the terms on which, occupants must surrender possession (§ 78B-6-510(4)(a)). On the application of the parties in interest, the court orders the deposit paid out before judgment as an advance, but that advance payment "shall be considered to be an abandonment by the defendant of all defenses except a claim for greater compensation," and an owner who received more than the final award faces a judgment for the excess (§ 78B-6-510(6)).

How is just compensation calculated in Utah?

The "court, jury, or referee" hears the evidence and assesses, among other items (Utah Code § 78B-6-511(1)):

• the value of the property sought to be condemned as a whole, "including all improvements pertaining to the property," and the value of each separate interest in it;
• if only part is taken, "the damages which will accrue to the portion not sought to be condemned by reason of its severance";
• damages to property that is not taken but "will be damaged by the construction of the proposed improvement";
• "separately, how much the portion not sought to be condemned ... will be benefitted, if at all." Benefits are deducted only from severance damages, so the owner always receives at least the value of the portion taken (§ 78B-6-511(1)(d));
• where water rights or part of a water delivery system are taken, damage to or impairment of the part of the system not taken; and
• for land with growing crops at the time the summons is served, the value the crops would have had after harvest, less cultivation and harvest costs.

Compensation is measured as of the date the summons is served, and improvements the owner adds after that date are not included (§ 78B-6-512(1), (3)).

If a government entity takes or damages property without bringing a condemnation case, the owner may sue under article I, section 22; the Governmental Immunity Act waives immunity for that claim (Utah Code § 63G-7-301(2)(d)), and compensation is assessed under the eminent domain statutes (§ 63G-7-302(1)).

Attorney fees and litigation expenses in Utah condemnation cases

Utah shifts litigation expenses through a settlement-offer rule that cuts both ways. Under Utah Code § 78B-6-509(7)(a), if the total just compensation awarded to the owner, "less interest and litigation expenses, is greater than the amount of total just compensation specified in the last settlement offer made by a defendant," the court "shall award the defendant or defendants litigation expenses not to exceed 1/3 of the amount by which the award of just compensation exceeds the amount offered in the last settlement offer." That award "may not exceed: (i) if there is one defendant in the case, $50,000; or (ii) if there are multiple defendants in the case, $100,000 total" (§ 78B-6-509(7)(b)).

Two features of the same section are easy to miss. An owner who never made a settlement offer under the section receives no litigation-expense award under it (§ 78B-6-509(10)). And subsection (8) works in the condemnor's favor: when the condemnor's last offer exceeds the award, the owner can be ordered to pay part of the condemnor's litigation expenses, within the limits that subsection sets.

The settlement-offer rule applies to actions filed on or after July 1, 2010 (§ 78B-6-509(12)). An owner's offer counts only if it is in writing and made within 30 days after the owner receives the condemnor's offer or, if the condemnor made none, after the close of discovery and no later than 45 days before trial; unless it states otherwise, it expires 21 days after service (§ 78B-6-509(5)).

Other provisions also shift expenses. A condemnor that abandons the case before final payment must, as a condition of dismissal, compensate the owner's damages and reimburse "all reasonable and necessary expenses actually incurred by condemnee because of the filing of the action by condemner, including attorney fees" (§ 78B-6-517). A judgment setting aside a condemnation for failure to build within the court's set time includes the owner's reasonable expenses, including attorney fees (§ 78B-6-520(2)). In a redevelopment-agency taking, the court may award costs and reasonable attorney fees when the award exceeds the agency's offer (§ 17C-1-905(1)).

Getting property back after a taking

Utah gives former owners three ways to recover property:

• Property not used for its purpose. For property purchased after May 11, 2009 under threat of condemnation, and subject to the exceptions in subsection (6), the condemnor must, before putting the property to "a use other than the public use for which the property was acquired," send the former owner a written offer by certified mail "offering to sell the acquired property to the condemnee at the acquisition price." The former owner may accept "within 90 days after the offer is sent" (Utah Code § 78B-6-520.3(3), (4)(a)).
• Surplus property. When the state or a subdivision declares property it acquired "through condemnation or threat of condemnation" to be surplus, it generally may not sell the real property unless it gives "the right of first refusal to the original grantor for the highest offer" where the original grantor has owned adjacent real property since the original transfer, on the terms set out in Utah Code § 78B-6-521(2). For a condemned easement, the right goes to the original grantor or a later bona fide purchaser who owns the burdened land. The holder has 90 days after receiving notice by registered mail to accept (§ 78B-6-521(2)). Since May 6, 2026 (H.B. 492, Laws 2026 ch. 371), if the holder does not buy, the state or subdivision may reject all bids and sell under the law that governs its property sales (§ 78B-6-521(3)); that amendment also removed the former provision letting the holder assign the right of first refusal. The section applies to property acquired after July 1, 1983.
• Project not built in time. Where the court in the condemnation case set a reasonable time for construction and use and it was not accomplished, the condemnee may sue to set aside the condemnation of the parcel or the unused portion. If the court finds the condemnor had no reasonable justification, it enters judgment for the amounts each side owes, and the property can revest in the condemnee on the terms of § 78B-6-520.

Relocation assistance

Utah's Relocation Assistance Act applies to government agencies and to "any other person whose use of the power of eminent domain results in a person becoming a displaced person" (Utah Code § 57-12-3(1)). To the greatest extent practicable, a project must be scheduled so that no lawful occupant has to move from a dwelling, business or farm without at least 90 days' written notice (§ 57-12-13(2)(e)), and no one may be required to move from a residence taken by condemnation until offered a comparable replacement dwelling (§ 57-12-7(1)). The agency reimburses recording fees and transfer taxes, mortgage prepayment penalties, prorated property taxes and relocation costs (§ 57-12-5).

Reasonable expenses to reestablish a displaced farm, nonprofit or business are capped at $75,000, adjusted for inflation each July 1 beginning in 2027; a displaced business or farm may instead accept a fixed payment of $1,000 to $75,000 (§ 57-12-4(3)-(4)). Disputes under the act may go to the Property Rights Ombudsman (§ 57-12-14).

Recent changes (2026)

• Relocation cap raised. S.B. 144 (Laws 2026 ch. 51), effective May 6, 2026, raised the cap on reestablishment expenses for a displaced farm, nonprofit or business from $50,000 to $75,000 and requires the Department of Transportation to adjust it for inflation each July 1 beginning July 1, 2027 (§ 57-12-4(3)).
• Surplus-property sales. H.B. 492 (Laws 2026 ch. 371), effective May 6, 2026, amended § 78B-6-521: the right of first refusal can no longer be assigned, and if the original grantor or later purchaser does not buy, the state or subdivision may reject all bids and sell under its general property-sale law.

Deadlines and traps for Utah owners

Utah Easement and Eminent Domain Laws at a Glance

Related Utah Property Laws

• Easement laws by state
• Eminent domain laws by state
• Utah squatters rights and adverse possession
• Utah property records
• Utah quitclaim deed rules

This article provides general legal information about Utah easement and eminent domain law, current as of 2026-10-20. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific property, contact a lawyer licensed in Utah or the Utah Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman.

Last updated: 2026-10-20.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long does it take to get a prescriptive easement in Utah?

Twenty years. The Utah Supreme Court requires use of another's land that was open, continuous and adverse under a claim of right for a period of twenty years (Orton v. Carter, 1998), proved by clear and convincing evidence (Judd v. Bowen, Utah Ct. App. 2017). The period comes from case law; statutes set the same 20 years only for water conveyances and historical livestock trails.

Is a Utah prescriptive easement the same as adverse possession?

No. A prescriptive easement gives a right to use another person's land, while adverse possession transfers title and runs under separate Utah statutes with their own period and requirements.

Who has the burden of proof in a Utah prescriptive easement case?

The claimant must prove the elements by clear and convincing evidence (Judd v. Bowen, Utah Ct. App. 2017). Once open and continuous use under a claim of right for the 20-year period is shown, the Utah Supreme Court presumes the use was adverse, and the landowner must prove the use was initially permissive; friendly relations alone do not defeat the claim (Zollinger v. Frank, 1946; Valcarce v. Fitzgerald, 1998).

What can I do if my land is landlocked in Utah?

Utah Code § 78B-6-501(2)(g) lists byroads leading from a highway to a residence or a farm among the public uses for which eminent domain may be exercised, and any taking must also meet the conditions in § 78B-6-504. Separately, the Utah Supreme Court recognizes a way of necessity when a single tract is divided so that one part is left with no access to a road, unless the parties clearly did not intend one (Tschaggeny v. Union Pacific Land Resources Corp., 1976).

Can a Utah landowner move an easement?

Under the Uniform Easement Relocation Act (Utah Code ch. 57-13c), a servient estate owner may relocate a covered easement only by obtaining a court order in a civil action (§§ 57-13c-104, -105), and only if the move does not materially lessen its utility, increase the holder's burden or impair its purpose, among other conditions in § 57-13c-103, and the servient owner pays the reasonable relocation expenses (§ 57-13c-106). Conservation, negative, public-entity, public-utility, water-conveyance and highway or transit easements cannot be relocated under the act, and moves made by agreement fall outside it.

Can Utah take private property for a private developer?

Utah Code § 78B-6-501 lists the public uses for which eminent domain may be exercised, and a taking must be necessary for an authorized use (§ 78B-6-504). Redevelopment agencies may not use eminent domain except in the situations § 17C-1-902(2) lists, such as an urban renewal project area after a development impediment determination. An agency also may not sue to take owner-occupied homes or businesses without a petition from a large majority of owners in the area and a two-thirds board vote (§ 17C-1-904).

Can Utah use eminent domain for a pipeline or power line?

The public-use list in Utah Code § 78B-6-501(2) includes gas, oil or coal pipelines and telecommunications, electric light and electric power lines. A condemnor filing for a high voltage power line must also complete an infrastructure siting analysis and submit it to the court (§ 78B-6-504(5)).

How is just compensation calculated in Utah?

The court, jury or referee assesses the value of the property taken, including its improvements, any severance damages to the remaining property, damages to property that is not taken but is damaged by the construction, and, separately, any benefit to the remainder, which can offset only severance damages (Utah Code § 78B-6-511(1)). Compensation is measured as of the date the summons is served (§ 78B-6-512(1)).

Does Utah pay attorney fees in eminent domain cases?

Under Utah Code § 78B-6-509(7), when the award (less interest and litigation expenses) exceeds the owner's last settlement offer, the court awards litigation expenses of up to one-third of the difference, capped at $50,000 for one defendant or $100,000 total for several. The rule depends on the owner having made a settlement offer, and a separate subsection can shift expenses to the owner when the condemnor's last offer beat the award. The rule applies to actions filed on or after July 1, 2010, and an owner's offer must be made within 30 days after the condemnor's offer (or, if there was none, no later than 45 days before trial). Separately, a condemnor that abandons the case must reimburse the owner's reasonable expenses including attorney fees (§ 78B-6-517), and in a redevelopment-agency taking the court may award attorney fees when the award exceeds the agency's offer (§ 17C-1-905).

Can I get my property back if Utah does not use it for the public project?

For property bought after May 11, 2009 under threat of condemnation, the condemnor must offer to sell it back at the acquisition price before putting it to another use, and the former owner has 90 days after the offer is sent to accept, subject to the exceptions in Utah Code § 78B-6-520.3. Separately, § 78B-6-521 generally gives an original grantor who has kept adjacent land a right of first refusal before the state or a subdivision sells condemned property it declares surplus, with 90 days after notice by registered mail to accept. And where a court set a reasonable time to build and the condemnor, without reasonable justification, did not, the former owner may sue to set aside the condemnation (§ 78B-6-520).