State ex rel. Sullivan v. Carrow
In State ex rel. Sullivan v. Carrow, 57 Ariz. 434, 114 P.2d 896 (1941), prior to construction of a highway, the State had assured the defendant property owners the highway would exist as constructed indefinitely. Id. at 436-37, 114 P.2d at 897.
Relying on the State's representations, the defendants constructed a recreational facility abutting the highway. Id. at 437, 114 P.2d at 897.
The State later decided to construct a new portion of the highway that directed traffic away from the defendants' property. Id.
Access to defendants' recreational area remained intact via the old highway, but the defendants argued it was more difficult after the change. Id.
In assessing what damages the defendants were entitled to recover, the supreme court emphasized that "no man can have a vested right in having traffic routed by his place of business." Id. at 440, 114 P.2d at 898. The court also distinguished Forsstrom, pointing out that "in the present case . . . the increased difficulty of access was not caused by a change in the grade on a right of way already established, but by the taking of a new right of way." Id. at 443, 114 P.2d at 899.
The court concluded the "defendants were entitled to such damages as were caused by the increased difficulty of access to their premises." Id.