Selected results

Parking lot in Chicago, Illinois
The City of Chicago filed a case to condemn 42,360 square feet or approximately one acre of land at the corner of Wabash and Harrison, one block south of Congress Parkway in Chicago, Illinois.  The property was being used as an at–grade asphalt commercial parking lot.  The City of Chicago had the property appraised and offered $3,000,000 for the entire property.  The City’s proposed use for the property was to construct a City–owned college dormitory.  Ryan & Ryan was told that the City had changed its mind and was going to transfer the entire property to the Chicago Transit Authority (“CTA”) which was going to build an elevated train structure through the property to straighten out the “S” curve at Wabash and Harrison Streets.  The City of Chicago and the CTA both passed ordinances to conduct a quick–take hearing to immediately acquire title to the property.  Ryan & Ryan challenged the City’s and the CTA’s need to acquire the whole property for this new purpose.  At the conclusion of the evidence, the Court agreed with us and indicated to the City and the CTA that it was not necessary to acquire the whole property to construct a new elevated train line through the property.  Ryan & Ryan settled the case by giving the CTA an easement through the property, over an area 48 feet by 250 feet, to construct the elevated train line.  The owners received $7,000,000 and were allowed to keep all of their property and park under the elevated train after it was constructed.  The owners also will be able to build under and over the train in the future if the owners decide to construct any building on the property.Our client was so pleased with the result that he agreed to double the attorneys’ fees provided in our contract.
 
Vacant land in Lisle, Illinois
The Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (“ISTHA”) condemned 21 acres of vacant land in an office park in Lisle, Illinois.  ISTHA testified at the trial to $6 per square foot or $5,500,000.  The jury verdict Ryan & Ryan obtained for the owner was $13,810,920 or $15.00 per square foot.  ISTHA appealed the jury verdict to the Appellate Court.On the day the attorneys for both parties were to argue the appeal in the Appellate Court, both parties agreed to settle the case for $12,763,447 and filed a written motion to dismiss the appeal and settle the pending case in the Appellate Court.The Appellate Court refused to dismiss the appeal and entered a 22–page decision that threw out the jury verdict and ordered that a new jury trial take place.  ISTHA refused to complete the settlement based upon the Appellate Court Order.Ryan & Ryan sued the Appellate Court judges and ISTHA to enforce the settlement in the Illinois Supreme Court.  The Illinois Supreme Court ruled for us and ordered the Appellate Court judges to vacate their 22–page decision and dismiss the appeal.  The Illinois Supreme Court further ordered ISTHA to pay the settlement of $12,763,447.
 
CTA acquisition of three–story retail building
The Chicago Transit Authority (“CTA”) filed an action to acquire a three–story retail building adjacent to the Belmont Avenue Station.  The CTA offered the owner $1,500,000 for the whole property.  Ryan & Ryan obtained $4,250,000 plus relocation and moving expenses for the owner.  In addition, per our settlement, the CTA will deed back to the owner one half of the 7,500–square–foot lot upon completion of the construction of the new station.
 
Waste transfer and recycling center
The City of Chicago filed a complaint to condemn a waste transfer and recycling center on the north side of O’Hare Airport in Des Plaines, Illinois for the O’Hare Modernization Project.  The owner had purchased one half of the land for $12.75 per square foot approximately 15 months before the valuation date in the case.  The City of Chicago had the property appraised and offered the owner $600,000 or $15 per square foot of land for the entire property.  Ryan & Ryan believed the property had special value due to its use as a waste transfer and recycling center.  The result Ryan & Ryan obtained for the owner was $4,175,000 or almost seven times greater than the City’s initial offer of just compensation.
 
Asphalt plant in Des Plaines, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan was retained by the owner of 15–acre asphalt plant to obtain just compensation for the City of Chicago’s acquisition of the property for the expansion of O’Hare Airport.  The City of Chicago offered $3,735,000 for the property prior to the filing of the City’s lawsuit to condemn.  Ryan & Ryan obtained $9,000,000 for the entire property and negotiated a relocation payment of $11,286,035.  The City agreed to take the property “as is” and pay for the environmental clean up.
 
Vacant land in Antioch, Illinois
The Illinois Department of Natural Resources (“IDNR”) offered $623,000 for 30.4 acres of vacant land in Antioch, Illinois.  Nearly 16 acres of the total 30 acres was buildable, and 14.5 acres was comprised of wetland and floodplain.  Ryan & Ryan negotiated a settlement that allowed the owner to keep the buildable 16 acres and the IDNR agreed to pay $589,153 to the owner for the reduced taking of the 14.5 acres of wetland and floodplain.
 
Parking lot in Chicago, Illinois
The City of Chicago condemned 3.87 acres or 168,577 square feet on 59th Street just east of Midway Airport that the owner used as a parking lot for Midway Airport.  The City offered $1,580,000 for the property.  Ryan & Ryan valued the property at $20,000,000, which included the value of the parking business conducted on the property.  Thereafter, the City reduced the taking to .704 acres or 30,680 square feet across the front of the property and paid $1,085,000 for the reduced taking.  The owner was able to keep his parking lot business.
 
Vacant land in Romeoville, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order for $6,500,000 for a partial taking by Romeoville. Romeoville offered $4,450,000 before the suit was filed. Ryan & Ryan negotiated a settlement giving the owner the right to use the property acquired by Romeoville for compensatory storage, which created five additional acres of developable commercial property on the owner’s remaining property.
 
Vacant land in Oak Brook, Illinois
The Forest Preserve District filed suit to acquire 66 acres in Oak Brook and Hinsdale, Illinois and offered the owner $4,050,000.  Shortly thereafter, the Forest Preserve District decided to file a second suit to acquire an additional 52 acres from the same property owner and offered $11,250,000 for the second taking.  Ryan & Ryan convinced the Forest Preserve District to acquire only 51 acres out of the 66 acres in the first condemnation suit for $10,000,000 and to abandon all the property in the second suit except for a 50–foot wide driveway for access to the 51 acre purchased property.  After the case was settled, the owner entered into a contract to sell 37 acres that were initially within the property to be acquired in the second lawsuit for $34,000,000.
 
Vacant land in Chicago, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order awarded the owner $2,372,581 for vacant property located on East Cermak Road in Chicago, Illinois.  The Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority offered the owner $570,000 before the case was filed.
 
Block 37 in Chicago, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a jury verdict of $2,500,000 for a 15,000 square foot building located at the northeast corner of Dearborn and Washington.  The property owner was offered $1,000,000 by the City of Chicago immediately before the case was filed.
 
Retail building on State Street in Chicago, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order awarding the owner $12,500,000 for a retail office building that wrapped around the southwest corner of State Street and Washington Street in Chicago, Illinois.  The property owners were offered $5,600,000 by the City of Chicago immediately before the case was filed.
 
Retail shopping center on South Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order awarding $3,160,000 for a shopping center at the corner of 115th and Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.  The property owner was offered $1,775,000 by the City of Chicago immediately before the case was filed.
 
Motel on Lincoln Avenue in Chicago, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a jury verdict awarding $2,610,000 for a motel on Lincoln Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.  The City of Chicago had initially offered $700,000 for the property.
 
Vacant building in Chicago, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order for $4,400,000 for a vacant building on the corner of 9th Street and Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.  The City of Chicago had initially offered $1,246,727.
 
Vacant land in Palatine, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan represented a property owner in Palatine who was offered $10,000,000 for vacant land.   Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order that awarded $16,570,000 in cash and an interest-bearing note.  In addition, the owner was given a 45% interest in the development that was built on the property.  The development was sold in 2004 and the owner received $3,990,000 for his interest.  The total compensation the owner received from the judgment order was $20,560,000 plus interest on the note.
 
Vacant land in Oak Brook, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment for $9,900,000 for a partial taking by the Illinois Department of Transportation along Route 83 in Oak Brook, Illinois.  The State offered $1,100,000 immediately before the suit was filed.
 
Dry cleaner in LaGrange, Illinois
Ryan & Ryan obtained a judgment order for $1,850,000 for a dry cleaner along Manheim Road.  The Village of LaGrange offered $750,000 immediately before the suit was filed.  As part of the settlement, the Village of LaGrange performed environmental remediation and was assigned any rights the owner had to reimbursement from the State of Illinois.
 
DISCLAIMER
In providing this information concerning other eminent domain matters handled by the firm it must be understood that neither the firm, nor any member of the firm, is suggesting that the results obtained in other eminent domain matters can also be achieved in your case. The outcome of any particular case will be controlled by many factors, including the specific facts and issues of law presented in that case. It should not be assumed from, nor do we intend to imply by the information supplied, that the results obtained in prior eminent domain matters can also be obtained in your particular case. If you have any questions concerning the contents of this statement, please contact our office prior to signing any agreement to retain the services of this law firm.