News Items for Bradley Gunn


Malkerson Gunn Martin CapX2020 Team Stands Ready With Over 150 years of Condemnation Experience

The CapX2020 Project is the largest transmission power line project in the history of our region. CapX2020 is a joint initiative of eleven transmission-owning utilities in Minnesota and the surrounding region to expand the electric transmission grid. Approximately 650 miles of transmission lines will be built in phases. For map locations, click here. The CapX 2020 transmission line consortium will acquire by negotiation or condemnation utility easements across thousands of parcels of private land. For more information, see: the CapX2020 proposed transmission project fact sheets.

The Malkerson Gunn Martin CapX2020 condemnation team is uniquely qualified to represent the interests of property owners in the powerline condemnation process. The MGM team consists of Bruce Malkerson, Rod Krass, Brad Gunn, Howard Roston and Tim Keane. Collectively, these attorneys have over 150 years of condemnation experience. The MGM CapX2020 condemnation team is in various stages of representation of property owners throughout the project area.

For more information on the Malkerson Gunn Martin attorneys with experience in this area, please visit our CapX2020 practice area page.

Minnesota Supreme Court holds that a condemning authority may not offset environmental clean up costs from the compensation due to owners in a condemnation action

Malkerson Gunn Martin attorneys Brad Gunn and Howard Roston submitted an amicus brief in the Minnesota Supreme Court case Moorhead Economic Development Authority v. Anda. Adopting many of the arguments made in the brief, the Supreme Court of Minnesota held that environmental clean up costs cannot be offset dollar for dollar in a condemnation action.

Click here to read the full ruling.

MGM Partner Brad Gunn Wins Minnesota Court of Appeals Case

Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP partner Brad Gunn secured a victory on behalf of his clients by successfully arguing the appeal of a trial court decision. Mr. Gunn convinced the Minnesota Court of Appeals that his clients were deprived of their property rights, entitling them to just compensation under the United States and Minnesota Constitutions.

The majority reached a conclusion in favor of Mr. Gunn’s clients:

After remand, appellants challenge the district court‘s determination that the 2002 Rochester International Airport Zoning Ordinance No. 4 did not effectuate a regulatory taking of their property as a matter of law. Because we conclude that the ordinance effectuated a regulatory taking of appellants‘ property, we reverse and remand.

The full decision can be found here.