Bruce K. and Marina V. Ney - Page 4

                                        - 3 -                                         
          matter of law.  As explained in detail below, we shall grant                
          respondent’s motion for partial summary judgment and deny                   
          petitioners’ motion for partial summary judgment.1                          
                                     Background                                       
               Petitioners owned two parcels of land in Felton, Delaware,             
          which the parties refer to as Procko Farm and Webber Farm,                  
          respectively (collectively, the properties).  In the late 1990s,            
          petitioners contacted the Delaware Agricultural Lands                       
          Preservation Foundation (DALPF) about selling their development             
          rights to the properties.  DALPF is a State instrumentality that            
          was established, in part, to prevent the conversion of Delaware’s           
          existing farmland to industrial or residential use.  DALPF                  
          accomplishes this goal by purchasing development rights to                  
          agricultural lands.  Landowners who sell their development rights           
          retain title to their property, but they agree to use it solely             
          for agriculture or related purposes.                                        
               At DALPF’s request, the properties were appraised by Real              
          Property Consultants, Inc. (RPC).  RPC inspected both Procko Farm           
          and Webber Farm in November 1999 and prepared an appraisal                  
          document for each property.  RPC appraised the development rights           
          to Procko Farm at $222,921 and the development rights to Webber             

               1 In their motion for partial summary judgment, petitioners            
          also seek to shift the burden of proof to respondent pursuant to            
          sec. 7491(a).  Because we render a decision as a matter of law,             
          we decide the parties’ motions without regard to the burden of              
          proof.                                                                      





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011