Petkus v. State Highway Commission

Plaintiffs concede that to be successful on this appeal they must overcome Mr. Gutschenritter’s testimony. They argue that his before and after-taking values were entitled to no weight because the factors he used in arriving at these values were general rather than special benefits and, therefore, not properly considered as offsets to damages. Sec. 32.09 (6), Stats.

Mr. Gutschenritter testified that the highest and best use of the land before taking was for agricultural purposes. After taking he considered the highest and best use of the land remaining to be for service facilities to the…