Court of Appeals Hears Challenge Over Admission of 2016 Sale and Other Evidence in UDOT Taking Case

The Utah Court of Appeals on Oct. 12 heard arguments in UDOT v. Boggess Draper Company over several trial rulings in a takings and severance‑damages dispute that the appellant says require reversal or a new trial.

Robert Mansfield, counsel for appellant Boggess Draper Company LLC, told the panel that the district court committed four errors that cumulatively prejudiced his clients: admitting evidence and photographs of a February 2016 sale and later development of the remainder property, excluding the purchase‑price figure in a written offer from AG Spanos, treating certain post‑project value increases as “special” rather than “general” benefits, and permitting UDOT evidence about project influence. Mansfield said those rulings altered the jury’s view of severance damages.

“The district court erred in allowing evidence regarding the 02/2016 sale subsequent sale of the, subject property,” Mansfield said, arguing the prejudicial effect outweighed probative value given the governing valuation date. He noted the court‑established valuation date was February 2009 and said the market conditions in 2016 were…