Client Results
 
 
1. How can Barron Adler help cut up property before taking to maximize compensation
(created 2 diffrent ownerships) ?
 
The Anderson Family owned 260 acres of farmland that was in the way of progress and a changing market. On one side, the property was bordered by a county road. The State condemned a diagonal row across the tract and offered compensation for the row taking based on a pro rata value for the whole paent tract. Prior to the date of taking, however, the landowner cut his property into five different parcels. Four of the parcels were configured with commercial and retail highest and best uses in mind and too advantage of the pre-take road frontage and had varying depths, as directed by the appraiser and the land planner after taking into account the developing market and the physical and legal constraints. One created parcel, constituting the bulk of the parent tract, but not the bulk of the land being taken, was determined to have a residential highest and best use. The Family then deeded the five parcels into different trusts for the children. The original offer from the state was $1,717,728 and the commissioners awarded $4,740,199. The landowners, with the bargaining leverage they had gained, were able to settle all cases for a total recover in excess of $4 million without the need to any significant litigation being required.


 
 
2. How has Barron Adler influenced the project's alignment on significant cases?
 
We represented the Arboretum Shopping Center in Austin… They were offered $35,000 for a small taking. The taking, however, impacted the throat depth of the driveway leaving and entering their ring road. When we were able to get a special commissioners award for in excess of $3 million, the State realized they could redesign the road and not take any property from the shopping center and thus were able to avoid any impact on the ring road.

We were asked by the Cass Edwards family to get involved in their anticipated condemnation case two years before it was anticipated that they would be approached for right of way. Because of this early and initial involvement, we were able to meet the client’s hope that we would be able to negotiate a right of way alignment, access points, over and underpasses, as well as infrastructure entitlements such as sewer and water lines, as well as a tax increment financing plan, that in total meant that the ultimate dollar increase (going from about $17 million to $29,164,230) was only half the true value of the settlement to the family.


 
 
3. How did a property owner devastate the case by protesting taxes incorrectly?
 
The Port offered about $3.4 million for a tract it was acquiring. The landowner’s appraisal indicated the value of the tract was about $14 million. Unfortunately, the client’s tax value agent had been challenging the ad valorem tax value of the tract, along with a larger portfolio of properties, for several years. In fact, the client, through this agent, had rendered the value of the property at vary close to the government’s offer. While we were able to settle the case for approximately $9.5 million, this client chose to settle at that level, rather than press for more, in part due to the reaction the mock jury panel had to testimony from the landowner at a higher market value than that to which they had sworn in that different context. When clients involve us in pre-planning, we are able to help them and their tax consultants frame ad valorem tax protests in a way that does not prejudice the condemnation case positions.


 
 
4. If a property owner bought or sold the property before or after the date of take, what can Barron Ad
 
A landowner buying or selling property that is or is anticipated to be involved in a condemnation case, there is the distinct possibility that the landowner will be created a sale that could be used to set value. We work with clients to help ensure that such a sale does this in situations where it helps the client, and we try to help the client make the use of such a sale by the condemnor difficult or impossible where that best serves the clients’ interest.

 
 
5. How can Barron Adler negotiate lease provisions as a tenant/landlord for the benefit of the client?
 
Few clients have ever really read the condemnation clauses in their leases prior to getting involved in a condemnation action. Unfortunately, once into a condemnation action such clauses can rarely be changed. What client’s don’t realize is that a condemnation clause can do more than merely decide how an eventual condemnation settlement is divided between a landlord and a tenant. Such a clause, by condemning a provision like calling for the termination of the lease where the condemnation is of the whole property, may very well mean that either the landlord 0or the tenant, regardless of their actual loss, may be precluded from any recovery at all as a matter of law…


 
 
6. What does Barron Adler do if a property owner thinks that a case is worth more than it should be?
 
We recently represented one of the largest developers in Austin which had received a $510K offer and had made a $575K counter offer which was declined by the State. The client thought his offered was reasonable and of the magnitude to which they were entitled and so brought the case to us. The client’s initial request was that we try to get his counteroffer accepted. But we were able to see a greater potential. By arguing a valuation based on an income approach, rather than a sales comparison approach for this unique use property, and recognizing that the value of the property is not set by the current lease but rather what should be the market lease, we were able to make a solid demand for $2,000,000. The case settled for $1,550,000

 
 
7. What are the largest delta case that Barron Adler has handled?
 
DFW Hyatt Hotel: $27 million to $42 million

Edwards Family: see above

Anderson Family: see above

Pfeffer: $540K to $3.4 million .


 
Copyright ©, Barron & Adler, L.L.P. | Site Map | Disclaimer
Law Firm Website Design and Hosting by Attorneys Online, Inc.