• Condemnation of land
• Condemnation of structures
• Condemnation of businesses
• Direct condemnation
• Inverse condemnation
• Right to take issues
• Compensation issues
• Valuation issues
• Highest and best use
• Severance damages
• Precondemnation damages
• Loss of goodwill
• Relocation rights

"No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation [emphasis added]." United States Constitution, Fifth Amendment (1791).

"Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation, ascertained by a Jury [emphasis added] unless waived, has first been paid to, or into court for, the owner. The Legislature may provide for possession by the condemnor following commencement of eminent domain upon deposit in court and prompt release to the owner of money determined by the court to be the probable amount of just compensation." Constitution of California, Article 1, §19 (1879).

"The fair market value of the property taken is the highest price [emphasis added] on the date of valuation that would be agreed to by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular or urgent necessity for so doing, and able to buy but under no particular necessity for so doing, each dealing with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable and available." California Code of Civil Procedure, §1263.320(a).

Government acquisitions or "takings" are not free market transactions. They are forced sales based on constitutional law, statutes and case law. Property owners should learn about their rights from a private property rights advocate. For years we have practiced almost exclusively in the field of eminent domain law, and we only represent private property owners. We are uniquely qualified and experienced to provide real estate owners and business owners with the information and representation they need.

We have been involved in representing real estate owners and business owners in eminent domain cases throughout San Diego, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside and Los Angeles Counties since 1995. We have been especially active against the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"). For example some of the many freeway projects on which we have represented owners in eminent domain cases include the following: the State Route 5, the State Route 56, the State Route 30, the State Route 76, the State Route 15, the State Route 52, the State Route 210, the State Route 125, the State Route 215 and the State Route 905. 

We have also been very active in representing real estate owners and business owners in numerous redevelopment projects and other public projects around Southern California, such as rail projects, utility projects, school projects and other public building projects.  For example, we were very active in representding real estate owners and business owners condemned for Petco Park, the new baseball stadium in downtown San Diego.

Our firm is dedicated to achieving for real estate owners and business owners the full extent of their constitutional guarantees by maximizing condemnation awards and challenging the government’s right to take when appropriate. If the right to take is not at issue, our fee structure is often based on a contingency, or percentage of the award that we earn over and above what the government agency offers the owner.

Recent Cases:
 The People of the State of California v. Wright, et. al., GIC 869036-1
  The State offered $628,052.  We obtained a judgment for $1,691,448.
 The People of the State of California v. Dante Corp., et. al., GIC 851065-1
  The State offered $948,000.  We obtained a judgment for $1,808,000.
 The People of the State of California v. Dorothy E. Parrott, et. al., 37-2009-00097703-CU-EI-CTL
  The State Offered $250,000.  We obtained a judgment for $862,995.25.
  (It included an award for attorneys fees and costs in the amount of $150,190.37.)