|
Post by wvhsparent on Oct 7, 2008 8:44:04 GMT -5
Brodie filed a on 9/23/08 to amend it's claims to add the items denied by Judge Popejoy onto the original condemnation (05ED79) case now in front of Judge French www.savefile.com/files/1825932
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Oct 7, 2008 8:44:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by WeNeed3 on Oct 7, 2008 13:05:41 GMT -5
Thanks for the update Parent.
So for us totally non-legal idiots, this means the additional stuff is gone for good and we still have the original fees, correct?
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Oct 7, 2008 14:19:17 GMT -5
I would never say "gone for good", but my read is that they are only able to argue for the items/fees they already submitted.
so no damage to remainder or loss of value BS they were trying to run thru.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Nov 7, 2008 13:08:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Nov 7, 2008 21:27:29 GMT -5
Is there a non-lawyer version available? I really can't get past opening it and my eyes get heavy. ;D
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Nov 7, 2008 21:55:24 GMT -5
Is there a non-lawyer version available? I really can't get past opening it and my eyes get heavy. ;D My take of it was that because the SD filed a Highway permit with DuPage County, a wetlands evaluation with the Army Corps of Engineers, and a Land Use Permit with Aurora, They (the SD) exerted control over the property to the exclusion of BB. (isn't that the very nature of condemnation?) thus the SD should compensate Brach for this as it thwarted their plans for a medium density Housing development........ After reading thru it, I think they are trying just about anything they can. I can't wait to read their response......
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Nov 25, 2008 11:59:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Nov 25, 2008 12:24:33 GMT -5
layman's summary, anyone?
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Nov 25, 2008 12:28:49 GMT -5
SD - They are asking for stuff that has absolutely no bearing on their fees claims, and they are exxagerating their "claim" that the SD had "possession" of the parcel due to the preliminary work started for annexation to Aurora.
Brach - DID NOT!!!! We want it cuz , well we just want it.......
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Nov 25, 2008 15:17:27 GMT -5
SD - They are asking for stuff that has absolutely no bearing on their fees claims, and they are exxagerating their "claim" that the SD had "possession" of the parcel due to the preliminary work started for annexation to Aurora. Brach - DID NOT!!!! We want it cuz , well we just want it....... LMAO. I got soda on my computer screen now, thank you very much. ;D
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Feb 1, 2009 1:29:25 GMT -5
SD - They are asking for stuff that has absolutely no bearing on their fees claims, and they are exxagerating their "claim" that the SD had "possession" of the parcel due to the preliminary work started for annexation to Aurora. Brach - DID NOT!!!! We want it cuz , well we just want it....... LMAO. I got soda on my computer screen now, thank you very much. ;D somebody told me once that several groups had 204 in their "crosshairs" and that 204 would basically go bankrupt form all the lawsuits
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 2, 2009 14:48:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Feb 2, 2009 14:53:24 GMT -5
executive summary, please?
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Feb 2, 2009 15:33:46 GMT -5
The intros on both are fairly good exec summaries. Brodie is much more emotional where Brach is more analytical.
I am still reading thru them....My eyes keep glazing over.
Basically. BB claim they had an offer for the parcel at 420k. SD came in with it's "Howie appraisal" of 257k. There were no further counteroffers as is customary. The SD then condemned causing them to lose their primo offer and spend vast sums defending themselves from the big bad SD......All our billing practices or sound and we would never try to over-bill....... Blah Blah Blah.....
|
|