The Arkansas Court of Appeals has upheld a jury’s $3 million compensation award, rejecting the state’s arguments that the verdict was excessive and that evidence about replacement roads should not have been admitted. A dispute over a small strip of land in Conway, Arkansas, grew into a decade-long legal battle after a highway project restricted access to the remaining property.
The dispute was about more than the land taken
A government acquisition involving just 1.62 acres of land has resulted in a multimillion-dollar compensation dispute in Arkansas, highlighting how a small taking can affect the value and potential use of a much larger property. In a ruling delivered on October 28, 2026, the Arkansas Court of Appeals upheld a $3 million jury verdict awarded to the William Major Lewis Trust after a highway project restricted the property’s direct access to Dave Ward Drive in Conway. The commission initially deposited $417,825 with the court as its estimate of just compensation. The affected property was near Interstate 40, and its frontage along Dave Ward Drive was important to its potential commercial use. The trust said it spent approximately $4 million to $4.5 million on the roads and had to use seven acres of its remaining property for their construction.
The trust said it could not develop the land as intended without building replacement roads, according to the court’s account. The decision in Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Lewis, published by Justia, affirmed the trial court’s judgment despite the commission’s challenge to the award and the evidence considered by the jury. But the trust argued that the impact went beyond the land physically acquired. By restricting direct, unrestricted frontage access to Dave Ward Drive, the project affected how the remaining property could be accessed and commercially developed. That distinction became central to the case. Cody Lewis testified that the City of Conway required the owners to construct a relocated Amity Road and an east-west connector road before they could make commercial use of the property adjoining Dave Ward Drive.
The case proceeded to a jury trial in June 2024. The jury awarded the trust $3 million, an amount lower than its appraiser’s estimate but substantially higher than the commission’s valuation. The appeals court said the $3 million verdict fell within the range of valuations presented at trial and found no basis to overturn it.
He said the loss of access and the need for additional roads reduced its commercial potential. It said evidence about the cost of restoring access can be considered when determining how a partial taking affects the market value of the remaining property. Cody Lewis also gave testimony about the property’s market value before and after the acquisition. The trial court subsequently awarded interest on the compensation balance, along with attorney’s fees, costs and appraiser’s fees. The commission appealed, challenging the admission of evidence about road-building costs, the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the verdict and the award of legal expenses. The Court of Appeals rejected the commission’s arguments. Such costs cannot automatically become the measure of compensation, but they can help a jury assess the difference in value before and after the acquisition. The jury had been instructed that road-restoration costs could be considered only as an aid in determining just compensation, not as the damages figure itself.