State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation & Development v. Mark Eric Milligan

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA, NO. 2025 CW 0439
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (PAGE 1 OF 2)
AND DEVELOPMENT

VERSUS

MARK ERIC MILLIGAN JULY 03, 2025
In Re: State of Louisiana, Department of Transportation and

Development, applying for supervisory writs, 19th
Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No.
698060.

BEFORE : THERIOT, PENZATO, WOLFE, GREENE, AND FIELDS, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The district court’s
March 14, 2025 judgment which denied, in part, the motion for
summary judgment filed by plaintiff/defendant-in-reconvention,
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (“DOTD”),
and granted, in part, the motion for partial summary judgment filed
by defendant/plaintiff-in-reconvention, Mark Eric Milligan
(“Milligan”) is reversed, in part. DOTD’s motion for summary
judgment is granted in part and Milligan’s motion for partial
summary judgment is denied in part as to the issues of replacement
costs and temporary housing costs. As the party challenging the
amount of just compensation deposited by DOTD, Milligan bore the
burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he was
entitled to a higher value. Par. of Livingston v. A&M Inv. Props.,
LLC, 2023-0912 (La. App. lst Cir. 6/27/24), 2024 WL 3198941, *9
(unpublished), writ denied, 2024-00959 (La. 11/14/24), 395 So. 3d
1185. For purposes of replacement costs, Milligan has failed to
offer factual support sufficient to establish the existence of a
genuine issue of material fact that the expropriated property was
indispensable to the conduct of business operations. State Through
Dep't of Highways v. Constant, 369 So. 2d 699, 707 (La. 1979).
Furthermore, while Milligan is entitled to be compensated to the
full extent of its loss, he is only entitled to damages that were
“actually incurred by the owner because of the expropriation.” La.
Const. art. I, § 4(B) (5). Milligan failed to offer factual support
sufficient to establish the existence of a genuine issue of fact
that his temporary housing claim was incurred because of the
expropriation. Accordingly, DOTD’s motion is granted in part, and
the claims of Milligan for replacement costs and temporary housing

costs are dismissed. Milligan’s motion for partial summary
judgment as to relocation costs, which include storage and moving
costs, is denied. Material issues of fact remain, precluding

summary judgment on those claims. In all other respects, the writ
is denied.

Fields, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. T concur
with the grant of the writ to deny the motion for partial summary

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

NO. 2025 CW 0439
(PAGE 2 OF 2)

judgment filed by defendant/plaintiff-in-reconvention, Mark Eric

Milligan, as to relocation costs, but would deny the remainder of
the writ.

_COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

“COURT
FOR THE COURT