|
Post by wvhsparent on May 13, 2008 9:32:24 GMT -5
I just returned from the Status hearing on the fees due to BB from the SD abandoning of BB. Brach was there and tendered their info, The SD was there, ready to accept the info for review, Brodie needs more time...given til June 10.... with the SD response due in 14 days. Kilander advised all that they might want to step it up as he is retiring at the end of June, if they want him to hear it. They set the hearing date to June 27
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on May 13, 2008 9:52:44 GMT -5
I just returned from the Status hearing on the fees due to BB from the SD abandoning of BB. Brach was there and tendered their info, The SD was there, ready to accept the info for review, Brodie needs more time...given til June 10.... with the SD response due in 14 days. Kilander advised all that they might want to step it up as he is retiring at the end of June, if they want him to hear it. They set the hearing date to June 27 What? Brodie needs more time. I am so not surprised. That has been the mantra for the past two years. And the NSFOC thinks we should talk to them. Why?
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on May 13, 2008 10:45:18 GMT -5
Which means Eola construction will be that much further along when Brodie makes its demands. Although, Brodie has no interest in stopping Eola, they just want their legal+PREIT+55-acre damages. The legal+PREIT would be in the picture even if the District bought the 55-acre BB property.
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on May 13, 2008 10:53:18 GMT -5
Which means Eola construction will be that much further along when Brodie makes its demands... Yes, the nFUD "slow down" mantra has less and less traction. BB's in no hurry - they clearly do not care about the students in 204. ...The legal+PREIT would be in the picture even if the District bought the 55-acre BB property. wow - great point - I bet nFUD isn't willing to honestly and accurately account for that on their made-up cost differences between the Eola and BB sites
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on May 13, 2008 10:59:16 GMT -5
Which means Eola construction will be that much further along when Brodie makes its demands. Although, Brodie has no interest in stopping Eola, they just want their legal+PREIT+55-acre damages. The legal+PREIT would be in the picture even if the District bought the 55-acre BB property. Cheers. they want there damages AND their land. That is why they fought the condemnation so hard. That is their right as property owners. I thought it was possible in the Dec-Jan time frame that the SB seriously looking at other pieces of land would encourage BB (especially Brodie) to finally negotiate. And still get a significant price for their land. Here is still more evidence that BB "negotiations" where at best of the "take it or leave variety". Pay the jury price or no deal.
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on May 13, 2008 12:33:14 GMT -5
Which means Eola construction will be that much further along when Brodie makes its demands... Yes, the nFUD "slow down" mantra has less and less traction. BB's in no hurry - they clearly do not care about the students in 204. ...The legal+PREIT would be in the picture even if the District bought the 55-acre BB property. wow - great point - I bet nFUD isn't willing to honestly and accurately account for that on their made-up cost differences between the Eola and BB sites BB has the legal right to go after the district for legal fees by statute (my estimate is $3.3M), and PREIT has already been awarded (although as the PREIT/BB deal fell through, its not clear whether the award still stands!). This would be true regardless of whether we buy BB or AME, as this is related to Eminent Domain statute. The District is liable for legal if the buy the land, or if they back out (which the District was fully within their rights to do, by statute) However, the perceived damages (BB is asking for $2.5M) for the alleged loss in value of the 55-acre property has no statutory basis (In the Brodie lawsuit, they point out that "...the statute is silent..." about this matter, and I checked, the statute is indeed silent!), and has no legal precedent. So Killander will be creating precedent if he awards that. Days before he retires.... And no, I do not expect the NSFOC to admit that the legal+PREIT are still incurred even if the BB property is purchased - that would mean that they are actually basing what they say on facts - what a concept! ;D Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on May 13, 2008 12:45:44 GMT -5
The Brodie Lawsuit (lost value) you speak of I believe is being heard by Judge Popejoy. Kilander is only dealing with the remnants of the condemnation proceedings...or am I thinking of something else?
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on May 13, 2008 13:05:05 GMT -5
The Brodie Lawsuit (lost value) you speak of I believe is being heard by Judge Popejoy. Kilander is only dealing with the remnants of the condemnation proceedings...or am I thinking of something else? I stand corrected if thats the case. I'll check. I know Popejoy is hearing the NSFOC lawsuit. Brach has not yet filed a case, except the Brodie lawsuit cover 50% of Brach claims for damage. Thanks! Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on May 13, 2008 13:11:59 GMT -5
FYI DuPage Case numbers -
05ED79 - Condemnation case - Kilander 08CH939 - NSFOC Case - Popejoy 08CH1366 - Brodie Lawsuit - Popejoy
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on May 13, 2008 14:31:22 GMT -5
District 204 could owe $2.2M for Brach land
May 13, 2008
By Jennifer Golz, jgolz@scn1.com
The cost of Indian Prairie School District 204’s abandonment of the Brach-Brodie parcel for its third high school will soon be known.
The Brach estate estimates costs incurred in the case exceeded $2.2. million and also are seeking damages in the value of land, according to documents filed today in DuPage County Circuit Court in Wheaton.
Absent from the court appearance were attorneys for the Brodie estate, who have been given two weeks to file their costs and estimated damages.
The district abandoned the eminent domain suit filed for the 55-acre parcel at Commons Drive and 75th Street after a jury deemed the land worth twice what the district had originally budgeted for it.
All sides will return to court June 10, when a hearing date will be set for arguments on the damages being sought.
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on May 13, 2008 14:53:20 GMT -5
District 204 could owe $2.2M for Brach land May 13, 2008 By Jennifer Golz, jgolz@scn1.com The cost of Indian Prairie School District 204’s abandonment of the Brach-Brodie parcel for its third high school will soon be known. The Brach estate estimates costs incurred in the case exceeded $2.2. million and also are seeking damages in the value of land, according to documents filed today in DuPage County Circuit Court in Wheaton. Absent from the court appearance were attorneys for the Brodie estate, who have been given two weeks to file their costs and estimated damages. The district abandoned the eminent domain suit filed for the 55-acre parcel at Commons Drive and 75th Street after a jury deemed the land worth twice what the district had originally budgeted for it. All sides will return to court June 10, when a hearing date will be set for arguments on the damages being sought. According to what I understand, the total legal attorneys fees for Brach and Brodie combined are limited to 20% of the increase they were able to obtain from the last firm offer from the District to the jury award- i.e 20% of ($518-$225)*55 acres= $3.3M approx. The statute that limits this is (735 ILCS 30/) Eminent Domain Act. below: ".... (f) Any award of attorney's fees under this Section shall be based solely on the net benefit achieved for the property owner, except that the court may also consider any non‑monetary benefits obtained for the property owner through the efforts of the attorney to the extent that the non‑monetary benefits are specifically identified by the court and can be quantified by the court with a reasonable degree of certainty. "Net benefit" means the difference, exclusive of interest, between the final judgment or settlement and the last written offer made by the condemning authority before the filing date of the condemnation complaint. The award shall be calculated as follows, subject to the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct: (1) 33% of the net benefit if the net benefit is $250,000 or less; (2) 25% of the net benefit if the net benefit is more than $250,000 but less than $1 million; or (3) 20% of the net benefit if the net benefit is $1 million or more. (g) This Section does not apply to the acquisition of property under the O'Hare Modernization Act. (Source: P.A. 94‑1055, eff. 1‑1‑07.) " So I guess if Brach gets $2.2, Brodie gets $1.1M... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on May 13, 2008 15:47:40 GMT -5
I like your thinking....but wasn't the last SD offer 257k/acre.... if so 20% (518-257)*55 = 2,871,000.
But I also think this is if the SD actually purchased the property. Seeing as they did not, they might be on the hook for all the atty fees, or a reasonable portion of them. I think that's why the judge wants to look over the costs, to see if they are pulling a fast one on some of their fees......Hopefully the SD will also be going over the fees very carefully.
Are there any attys out there who could verify?
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on May 13, 2008 19:07:06 GMT -5
I like your thinking....but wasn't the last SD offer 257k/acre.... if so 20% (518-257)*55 = 2,871,000. But I also think this is if the SD actually purchased the property. Seeing as they did not, they might be on the hook for all the atty fees, or a reasonable portion of them. I think that's why the judge wants to look over the costs, to see if they are pulling a fast one on some of their fees......Hopefully the SD will also be going over the fees very carefully. Are there any attys out there who could verify? Good point. You're right - the final offer was $257K. Reading the statute gives me a headache - I do not know what happens to attorneys fees if the condemnor backs out. Subsection (f) is in the same section that gives the District the right to back out, but the language is confusing to me. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on May 13, 2008 21:49:22 GMT -5
I like your thinking....but wasn't the last SD offer 257k/acre.... if so 20% (518-257)*55 = 2,871,000. But I also think this is if the SD actually purchased the property. Seeing as they did not, they might be on the hook for all the atty fees, or a reasonable portion of them. I think that's why the judge wants to look over the costs, to see if they are pulling a fast one on some of their fees......Hopefully the SD will also be going over the fees very carefully. Are there any attys out there who could verify? Good point. You're right - the final offer was $257K. Reading the statute gives me a headache - I do not know what happens to attorneys fees if the condemnor backs out. Subsection (f) is in the same section that gives the District the right to back out, but the language is confusing to me. Cheers. If your confused by it ...we're all in trouble!!! ;D
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on May 13, 2008 22:42:19 GMT -5
Someone on the blue board was claiming that Brodie is asking for $13M? Does anyone know where that is coming from?
Cheers.
|
|