They argued that Wisconsin law prevented them from raising constitutional claims alongside their compensation challenge, effectively barring them from litigating whether the property was taken for a private rather than public purpose.
“The result of these decisions bars the landowners… from litigating the constitutional question of whether their property was impermissibly taken for a private purpose,” the residents argued in their petition to the Supreme Court.
Federal and State Courts Rebuff Residents
The Seventh Circuit dismissed the federal case, agreeing with U.S. District Judge Brett H. Ludwig, who found the lawsuit to be “gamesmanship” designed to sidestep state court rulings. Judge Ludwig also criticized the plaintiffs’ attorney, Erik S. Olsen, for filing the federal case after years of litigation in state court.
The Seventh Circuit held that under Wisconsin law, property owners must choose between challenging the compensation amount or the validity of the taking itself. By pursuing compensation claims first, Antosh and Lashley forfeited the ability to challenge the legality of the taking.
