Short answer. After taking an oath, the commissioners hear evidence, view and examine the property, and let each party argue the case. They assess consequential damages to the untaken portion, offset by consequential benefits, but consequential benefits can never exceed consequential damages or deprive the owner of the property's actual value.

What the law says

Before entering upon the performance of their duties, the commissioners shall take and subscribe an oath that they will faithfully perform their duties as commissioners, which oath shall be filed in court with the other proceedings in the case. Evidence may be introduced by either party before the commissioners who are authorized to administer oaths on hearings before them, and the commissioners shall, unless the parties consent to the contrary, after due notice to the parties to attend, view and examine the property sought to be expropriated and its surroundings, and may measure the same, after which either party may, by himself or counsel, argue the case. The commissioners shall assess the consequential damages to the property not taken and deduct from such consequential damages the consequential benefits to be derived by the owner from the public use or purpose of the property taken, the operation of its franchise by the corporation or the carrying on of the business of the corporation or person taking the property. But in no case shall the consequential benefits assessed exceed the consequential damages assessed, or the owner be deprived of the actual value of his property so taken.

Rule 67, Section 6 — Proceedings by commissioners. Read the full provision →

Oath, evidence, and a site visit

Before doing anything else, the commissioners must take and subscribe an oath to faithfully perform their duties, filed in court with the rest of the case record. From there, either party may introduce evidence before them, and unless the parties agree otherwise, the commissioners must give due notice and then view and examine the property and its surroundings, even measuring it, after which either party may argue the case.

Assessing damage to what is left behind

For the portion of the property not being taken, the commissioners assess the consequential damages caused to it by the expropriation, and they deduct from that figure any consequential benefits the owner will derive from the public use, the operation of the taking entity's franchise, or the conduct of its business. This nets the two figures against each other so the owner's ultimate compensation reflects the real economic effect of the taking on what remains, not just the value of the piece actually taken.

A protective ceiling for the owner

The offsetting of benefits against damages is not unlimited. The rule expressly caps it: consequential benefits assessed can never exceed the consequential damages assessed, and in no case may the owner end up deprived of the actual value of the property that was actually taken. In other words, benefits can reduce or wipe out a consequential-damages award, but they can never be used to eat into the compensation owed for the property itself.

Why the site visit and hearing matter

The oath, the hearing where either party may present evidence, and the on-site viewing and measuring of the property are not formalities layered on top of the assessment — they are how the commissioners build the factual basis for the damages and benefits figures they ultimately report. Skipping straight to a number without that process would leave the eventual report without the grounding the rule requires.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.