United States v. 4.16 Acres of Land

This Court has previously decreed, by judgment entered May 28,1956, that the award of compensation in this case must include the reasonable replacement cost of substitute bridge and road facilities. Defendants have moved for the referral of the issue of just compensation for such facilities to a commission under the provisions of Rule 71A(h), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., 28 U.S.C.A. Plaintiff has made timely demand for jury trial in the case and opposes the granting of defendants’ motion. Hence, the sole issue for determination at this time is whether, in the discretion of the Court, the facts of this case wax-rant ■ referral to a commission pursuant to Rule 71A (h).

It is not to be doubted that the Court is given wide discretion in this matter, United States v. Theimer, 10 Cir., 199 F.2d 501 , and in exercising that discretion, the Court may take into consideration the “character, location, or quantity of the property to be condemned, or * * * other reasons in the interest of justice”, Rule 71A(h), supra.

While some courts have chosen to limit the trial court’s discretion to refer the case to a commission to situations where the facts are exceptionally and extraordinarily complex,…