- PROGRAMS
- PUBLICATIONS
- SUBSCRIPTIONS
- SPONSORSCloseBack
- JOB BOARDCloseBack
- ABOUT US
- PROGRAMS
- PUBLICATIONS
- SUBSCRIPTIONS
- SPONSORSCloseBack
- JOB BOARDCloseBack
- ABOUT US
Choose whether or not to include highlighting and notes in the print view. Depending on your browser, you may have to change print options to include background colors.
- You must be a paid subscriber to access the downloads
-
Chapter 1 — The Power of Eminent Domain: Introduction and Overview - I. [1.1] Overview
- II. [1.2] The Power, Its Source, and Its Limitations
- III. [1.3] The 2007 Illinois Eminent Domain Act
-
IV. Authority To Exercise the Power of Eminent Domain - V. The Exercise of the Power of Eminent Domain: A Typical Eminent Domain Action
- [1.7] Prerequisites to Filing the Complaint
- [1.8] Authority, Public Purpose, and Necessity
- [1.9] Negotiation with Property Owner
- Filing the Complaint
- [1.10] Contents of the Complaint
- [1.11] Public Utilities
- [1.12] Common Elements
- [1.13] Service of Process
- [1.14] Lis Pendens
- [1.15] Answer and Cross-Petition
- [1.16] Traverse — Attacks on the Propriety of the Complaint
- [1.17] Authority, Public Purpose, and Necessity
- [1.18] Legal Description
- [1.19] Attempt To Agree on Compensation
- [1.20] Illinois Commerce Commission Approval
- [1.21] Discovery
- [1.22] Discovery of Facts or Documents
- [1.23] Discovery of Witnesses
- [1.24] Trial
- [1.25] Motions in Limine
- [1.26] View of the Property
- [1.27] Testimony and Evidence
- [1.28] Jury Instructions
- [1.29] Abandonment
- [1.30] Posttrial
- [1.31] The Judgment Order
- [1.32] Deposit
- [1.33] Motion To Vest Title
- [1.34] Withdrawing the Deposit
- [1.35] Property Taxes
- VI. [1.36] Use of Eminent Domain for Urban Redevelopment
- VII. [1.37] Quick-Take
- VIII. [1.38] Relocation
- IX. Appendix
- Chapter 2 — Initial Procedures and Pleadings of the State and Other Condemning Bodies
- I. Introduction
- II. Precondemning Procedure
- [2.3] Preliminary Considerations
- [2.4] Hiring Appraisers
- [2.5] Personal Inspection of the Property
- [2.6] Identifying the Parties
- [2.7] Compliance with Federal and State Prerequisites — Environmental, Landmark Protection, Relocation, and Farmland Preservation Statutes
- [2.8] Surveys
- [2.9] Environmental Assessment
- [2.10] Identifying the Occupants
- [2.11] Special Parties —Active Duty Military Personnel and Their Dependents
- [2.12] Relocation Reimbursement
- [2.13] Relocation Coordinator
- [2.14] Sixty-Day Notice Letter for State Agencies
- [2.15] Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act
- Conditions Precedent to Filing
- [2.16] Authority and Delegation of Authority To Implement Condemnation
- [2.17] Successive Condemnations
- [2.18] Prerequisites for New Quick-Take Authority
- [2.19] Quick-Take — What Is a Formally Adopted Schedule or Plan of Operation?
- [2.20] Availability of Funds Not Condition Precedent to Filing Petition
- [2.21] Final Plans of Project Not Condition Precedent to Filing Petition
- [2.22] Prior Notice Not Condition Precedent to Filing Petition — Other than by State Agencies
- [2.23] Delay in Instituting or Prosecuting Condemnation Action Not Fatal
- [2.24] Approval of Illinois Commerce Commission for Public Utility Property
- [2.25] Special Considerations —Railroad Property
- [2.26] Condemnation for Use by Another Governmental Entity — Intergovernmental Cooperation
- [2.27] Condemnation of Property of Another Public Entity — Municipal Acquisition of Public Property
- [2.28] Preservation of Status Quo While Condemnation Is Pending
- [2.29] Notice of Right-of-Way Designation and Advance Acquisition
- [2.30] Prefiling Contacts with the Owner
- [2.31] Records of Conversations
- [2.32] Prefiling Inspection
- Attempt To Agree as to Compensation
- [2.33] Attempt To Agree a Prerequisite
- [2.34] Condemnation Following Unsuccessful Negotiations by the Expected Developer
- [2.35] Who May Submit the Condemnor’s Offer?
- [2.36] Testing the Sufficiency of the Attempt
- [2.37] Form Indicating Attempt To Agree
- [2.38] Conferences with Unrepresented or Represented Defendant
- [2.39] Terminating the Negotiations
- [2.40] Waiver
- [2.41] Multiple Owners, Incompetents, and Nonresidents
- [2.42] Standards for Finding an Attempt To Agree
- [2.43] Good-Faith Offer —Reasonableness of the Amount
- [2.44] Successful Negotiations —Acquisition by Agreement
- [2.45] Voluntary Conveyance
- [2.46] Statements by Public Officials — Are They Binding?
- III. Complaint for Condemnation
- [2.47] Source and Purpose
- [2.48] Elements of the Complaint for Condemnation
- [2.49] Name in Which the Action Is Brought
- [2.50] Necessary Parties Defendant
- [2.51] Unknown Owners
- [2.52] Statement of Authority
- [2.53] Statement of Purpose
- [2.54] Statement of Necessity
- [2.55] Necessity — Replacement Property
- [2.56] Failure To Agree on Compensation
- [2.57] Description of Property Sought
- [2.58] Description of Interest Sought
- [2.59] Jury Demand
- [2.60] Prayer for Relief
- [2.61] Summons
- [2.62] Service by Publication
- [2.63] Service of Summons; Special Process Servers
- [2.64] Excusing Service of Complaint for Condemnation
- [2.65] Motions for Appointment of Guardians ad Litem
- [2.66] Lis Pendens Notice
- [2.67] Amendments to the Complaint for Condemnation
- [2.68] Abandonment —Condemnor’s Dismissal of the Complaint
- IV. Appendix
- Chapter 3 — Pleadings and Procedures by the Condemnee
- I. [3.1] Scope of Chapter
- II. [3.2] Initial Considerations
- III. [3.3] Early Discovery
- IV. Traverse and Motion To Dismiss
- [3.4] Purpose
- [3.5] Time of Filing
- [3.6] Grounds
- [3.7] Necessity
- [3.8] Public Purpose
- [3.9] Bona Fide Attempt To Agree
- [3.10] Condemnor’s Authority
- [3.11] Property Subject to Condemnation
- [3.12] Proper Description
- [3.13] When Traverse Does Not Lie
- [3.14] Trial of a Traverse
- [3.15] If the Traverse Is Denied
- [3.16] If the Traverse Is Granted
- V. [3.17] Counterclaim
- VI. [3.18] Right To Open and Close
- VII. [3.19] View of Premises
- VIII. [3.20] Later Motions
- IX. [3.21] Significant Decisions
- X. [3.22] Final Concerns
- XI. Appendix— Forms
- Chapter 4 — Quick-Take
- I. [4.1] Scope of Chapter
- II. [4.2] Purpose of Quick-Take
- III. Who Has Quick-Take Powers?
- IV. How Is Quick-Take Commenced?
- [4.6] Time for Filing of Motion
- [4.7] Contents of Motion
- [4.8] Setting the Hearing
- [4.9] Service of Motion and Notice of Hearing
- [4.10] Necessary Proofs at Quick-Take Hearing
- [4.11] Plaintiff’s Right To Acquire the Property by Condemnation
- [4.12] Plaintiff Has Authority To Acquire the Property by Condemnation
- [4.13] The Property Is Subject to the Right or Authority of Condemnation
- [4.14] The Right Is Being Exercised Properly
- [4.15] Necessity for Use of Quick-Take Procedures
- [4.16] Amount of Preliminary Just Compensation
- V. [4.17] Order Fixing Preliminary Just Compensation
- VI. [4.18] Deposit of Funds and Vesting of Title
- VII. [4.19] Withdrawal of Preliminary Just Compensation
- VIII. Ancillary Issues
- IX. Appeals
- X. Subsequent Proceedings
- XI. Sample Pleadings and Documents
- [4.29] Sample Motion for Immediate Vesting of Title
- [4.30] Sample Publication Notice
- [4.31] Sample Order Setting Hearing on Motion for Immediate Vesting of Title
- [4.32] Sample Order Fixing Preliminary Just Compensation
- [4.33] Sample Treasurer’s Receipt
- [4.34] Sample Order Vesting Title
- [4.35] Sample Motion To Withdraw Preliminary Just Compensation
- [4.36] Sample Order Authorizing Withdrawal of Preliminary Just Compensation
- Chapter 5 — Eminent Domain Proceedings by Government Authorities Other than the State
- I. [5.1] Introduction
- II. Tax Increment Financing Districts
- III. Preliminary Considerations
- [5.5] Follow the Statute to the Letter
- [5.6] Develop a Plan
- [5.7] Condemnor’s Plan
- [5.8] Condemnee’s Plan
- [5.9] Tax Consequences
- Should Owners Oppose the Project?
- [5.10] Condemnation Could Be a Benefit
- Owner Opposes the Project
- [5.11] Start Early
- [5.12] Seek Political and Legislative Support
- [5.13] Should the Condemnor or Condemnee Seek Early Resolution of the Condemnation Action?
- [5.14] Seek Proper Authority
- IV. [5.15] Home Rule
- V. [5.16] Lessees’ Claims
- VI. [5.17] Notice
- VII. [5.18] Good-Faith Attempt To Settle Before Suit
- VIII. Transferring Property from One Private Owner to Another by Condemnation
- IX. [5.23] Inverse Condemnation
- X. [5.32] Excessive Taking
- XI. [5.33] Pressure To Convey or Be Condemned
- XII. [5.34] Who Acts for the Condemnor?
- XIII. [5.35] Other Condemnation Areas
- XIV. [5.40] Conclusion
- Chapter 6 — Pretrial Procedure
- I. [6.1] Scope of Chapter
- II. Initial Preparation
- [6.2] Owner’s Attorney
- [6.3] Traverse and Motion To Dismiss
- [6.4] Owner’s Acquisition
- [6.5] Property Uses
- [6.6] Documents, History, and Experts
- [6.7] Offers To Purchase
- [6.8] Other Litigation, Tax Assessment, or Appraisal
- [6.9] Owner’s Plans for the Property
- [6.10] Owner’s Offer To Sell Property
- [6.11] Materials Received from Condemning Authority; Sample Notice To Produce at Quick-Take
- [6.12] Sales of Properties in Area
- [6.13] Leasehold Interests or Other Encumbrances
- [6.14] Environmental Contamination
- [6.15] Pre-Condemnation Offer
- [6.16] In Summary
- [6.17] Condemnor’s Attorney
- [6.18] Determining the Types of Opinion Witnesses Needed
- [6.19] Factors in Selecting a Valuation Consultant or Witness
- III. Quick-Take Proceedings
- IV. Discovery
- V. Pretrial Motions and Issues
- [6.29] Issues of Title
- [6.30] New Valuation Date
- [6.31] Leasehold Interest
- [6.32] Damage to the Remainder
- [6.33] Bill of Particulars
- [6.34] Inspection of Real Estate; Sample Agreed Protective Order
- [6.35] Motion in Limine
- [6.36] Case Management Conference
- [6.37] Offers To Settle Before Trial
- [6.38] Pretrial Appeals
- Chapter 7 — Valuation of Property in Eminent Domain
- I. Introduction
- [7.1] Scope of Chapter
- [7.2] Historical Background
- [7.3] Sources of Valuation Rules: 1970 Constitution; Statutes; Pattern Jury Instructions; and Uniform Eminent Domain Code
- [7.4] Appellate Review
- The Eminent Domain Act and Valuation
- [7.5] Background
- [7.6] Effective Date and Exceptions
- [7.7] Relocation Assistance
- [7.8] Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Costs
- [7.9] Change in Valuation Date
- [7.10] Cross-Reference to Article VII of Code of Civil Procedure
- II. Valuation in Complete Acquisitions
- Just Compensation
- [7.11] Just Compensation as Fair Cash Market Value
- [7.12] Interest as Just Compensation
- [7.13] Payment in Excess of Just Compensation
- Fair Cash Market Value
- [7.14] Determining Fair Cash Market Value
- [7.15] Proving Market Value by Opinion Testimony
- [7.16] Appraisers as expert witnesses
- [7.17] Bases of appraisers’ opinions
- [7.18] Facts and data reasonably relied on and admissibility
- [7.19] Gatekeeper role of trial judge
- [7.20] Market or Comparable-Sales Approach
- [7.21] Cost Approach
- [7.22] Income Approach
- [7.23] Elements Excluded from Market Value
- [7.24] Appreciation or Depreciation Caused by Project
- [7.25] Illegal Use
- [7.26] Business Done on Property
- [7.27] Costs of Moving
- [7.28] Taxation
- [7.29] Replacement Costs
- [7.30] Minerals, Timber, and Farm Property
- [7.31] Subdivision Property
- [7.32] Billboards
- [7.33] Unit Rule
- [7.34] Partial Takings
- [7.35] Cross-Examination of Experts
- [7.36] Highest and Best Use
- [7.37] Reasonable Probability Questions
- [7.38] Special-Use Property
- [7.39] Date of Valuation
- III. Valuation in Partial Acquisitions
- [7.40] General Principles
- [7.41] Cross-Petition
- [7.42] Valuation of Part Taken
- [7.43] Stipulations
- [7.44] Definition of “Remainder Property”
- [7.45] Proper Elements of Damages
- [7.46] Cost To Cure
- [7.47] Reduction in Size
- [7.48] Noise
- [7.49] Unsightliness
- [7.50] Access
- [7.51] Improper Elements of Damage
- [7.52] Benefits
- IV. Valuation in Easement Acquisitions
- Chapter 8 — Trial Procedure and Technique
- I. Trial Advocacy in Eminent Domain Cases
- II. General Procedural Rules
- III. Jury
- IV. [8.10] Opening Statement — General Theory
- V. Jury View of Property
- VI. [8.15] Collateral Evidence
- VII. [8.16] Comparable-Sales Evidence — General Rules
- VIII. [8.17] Voluntary Transactions for Cash
- IX. [8.20] Similarity
- X. Purchase Price of the Subject Property
- XI. [8.32] Wilson v. Clark and Its Effect on Admission of Comparable-Sales Evidence
- XII. [8.33] Conclusion Regarding Sales Evidence
- XIII. Demonstrative Evidence— Maps, Plats, and Photographs
- XIV. Presenting Valuation Witnesses
- XV. [8.38] Right To Open and Close
- XVI. Jury Instructions
- XVII. [8.45] Closing Argument
- Chapter 9 — Mandamus and Inverse Condemnation
- Chapter 10 — Leasehold Damages and Awards in Eminent Domain
- I. Introduction
- II. The Parties
- III. The Condemnation Proceeding
- [10.7] Complete Taking
- [10.8] Partial Taking
- [10.9] Valuation of Leasehold —Two Methods
- [10.10] Apportionment as Part of the Jury Trial
- [10.11] Posttrial-Apportionment Hearing
- Evidence —Valuation of Leasehold
- [10.12] Burden of Proof
- [10.13] Options and Verbal Leases
- [10.14] Permanent Improvements
- [10.15] Unit Rule for Improvements
- [10.16] Bonus Value
- [10.17] Valuation Witnesses
- [10.18] Valuation Testimony in Separate Apportionment Proceeding
- [10.19] Comparable-Leasehold Valuation
- [10.20] Consequential Losses
- IV. [10.21] Effect of Eminent Domain Act on Leasehold Damages and Awards
- V. [10.22] Conclusion
- VI. Appendix — Sample Forms
- Automatic Termination Clauses
- [10.23] Condemnation Clause
- [10.24] Compensation Clause
- Condemnation Clauses
- [10.25] Total Condemnation Clause
- [10.26] Partial Condemnation Clause
- [10.27] 60-Day Letter (To Be Sent by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested)
- [10.28] Tenant’s Waiver of Lease
- [10.29] Cross-Complaint
- [10.30] Motion for Separate Verdict
- [10.31] Motion for Apportionment of Condemnation Award
- Chapter 11 — Federal Eminent Domain Practice
- I. [11.1] Scope of Chapter
- II. [11.2] Federal Power To Condemn
- [11.3] Purpose
- [11.4] What Constitutes a Taking
- [11.5] When Power Is Exercised
- [11.6] Federal Authorities Having Power To Condemn
- [11.7] Governing Law
- [11.8] Federal Policy on Real Property Acquisition and Use of Federal Funds — The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
- Limitations on Power of Eminent Domain
- [11.9] Just Compensation
- [11.10] Public Use
- [11.11] Necessity and Expediency of Taking
- [11.12] Temporary Takings
- [11.13] Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Program
- III. Valuation and Damages
- [11.14] Rules of Just Compensation
- [11.15] Measure of Compensation
- [11.16] Non-Compensable Elements
- Evidence of Value
- [11.17] Comparable Sales
- [11.18] Prior Sales
- [11.19] Highest and Best Use
- [11.20] Subdivision Approach
- [11.21] Business Income
- [11.22] Tax Assessments
- [11.23] Offers
- [11.24] Separate Values of Improvements
- [11.25] Zoning Restrictions
- [11.26] Prices Paid by Condemnor
- [11.27] Consequential Damages When No Property Is Taken
- [11.28] Setoff
- IV. Possession and Title
- V. [11.31] Procedure in Federal Condemnation
- [11.32] Jurisdiction and Venue
- [11.33] Joinder of Properties
- [11.34] Complaint
- [11.35] Process
- [11.36] Appearance or Answer
- [11.37] Objections and Defenses
- [11.38] Amendment of Pleadings, Substitution of Parties, and Dismissal
- [11.39] Burden of Proof
- [11.40] Discovery
- [11.41] Methods and Conduct of Trial
- [11.42] Trial by Tribunal of Issue of Just Compensation
- [11.43] Trial by Jury of Issue of Just Compensation
- [11.44] Trial by Commission of Issue of Just Compensation
- [11.45] Trial by District Court of All Other Issues
- [11.46] Court Costs
- [11.47] Equal Access to Justice Act
- [11.48] Costs Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §4654(a)
- [11.49] Fed.R.Civ.P. 68 Costs
- [11.50] Abandonment
- VI. Remedies of Interest Holders Neither Paid nor Proceeded Against
- VII. [11.55] Relocation Payments: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act
- VIII. Revestments, Exchanges, and Disposals
- IX. Appendix — Sample Forms
- Forms Relating to Declaration of Taking
- [11.65] Declaration of Taking
- [11.66] Petition for Distribution of Deposit
- [11.67] Order for Distribution
- [11.68] Petition of Owners for Payment of Deposit for Taxes, for Lien, and to Owners
- [11.69] Complaint in Condemnation
- [11.70] Notice of Condemnation
- [11.71] Answer to Complaint
- [11.72] Appearance
- Chapter 12 — Environmental Law Issues in Eminent Domain Litigation
- I. Introduction
- II. [12.3] Environmental Laws That May Impose Liabilities
- [12.4] Federal and State Superfund Laws
- [12.5] Liabilities Under CERCLA
- [12.6] Extent of Financial Liability Under CERCLA
- [12.7] Private Cost Recovery Actions Under CERCLA
- [12.8] Defenses to Liability Under CERCLA
- [12.9] Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
- [12.10] RCRA Underground Storage Tank Regulation
- [12.11] Financial Responsibility Requirements and Illinois Underground Storage Tank Fund
- [12.12] Toxic Substances Control Act
- [12.13] Clean Air Act
- [12.14] Clean Water Act
- III. [12.15] Environmental Laws That Can Constrain Development of Property
- [12.16] Floodplain and Floodway Regulation
- [12.17] National Flood Insurance Act
- [12.18] Other Federal Statutes
- [12.19] State Regulation of Floodplains and Floodways
- [12.20] Local Regulation of Floodplains and Floodways
- [12.21] Wetlands Regulation
- [12.22] National Environmental Policy Act
- [12.23] Endangered Species Act
- [12.24] Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
- IV. Discovery Issues — Right To Inspect Property
- V. Evidentiary Issues
- [12.29] Highest and Best Use
- [12.30] Evidence of Environmental Conditions Affecting Highest and Best Use
- [12.31] Evidence of Costs Incurred To Alleviate or Minimize Environmental Conditions
- [12.32] Highest and Best Use Dependent on Government Action
- [12.33] Effect of Environmental Conditions on Use of Comparable Sales; General Rules of Comparable-Sales Approach
- [12.34] Sales of Properties Equally Affected by Environmental Conditions
- [12.35] Use of Estimated Costs To Place Properties on Equal Footing
- [12.36] Comparable Sales with Dissimilar Environmental Conditions
- [12.37] Admission of Substandard or Illegal Condition
- [12.38] Admission of Demonstrative Evidence in Proving Environmental Conditions
- [12.39] Plats and Plans
- [12.40] Prefiling Plans for Development
- [12.41] Post-Filing Plats or Development Plans
- [12.42] Photographs
- [12.43] Contour Maps and Wetland Delineations
- [12.44] Public Records
- [12.45] Appraisal Standards
- Chapter 13 — Appeals
- I. [13.1] Scope of Chapter
- II. Preliminary Considerations
- III. [13.6] No Error vs. Error
- IV. Additional Considerations
- V. [13.14] Particular Types of Appeals
- Interlocutory Appeals
- [13.15] Appeal from Final Judgment Not Disposing of Entire Proceeding
- [13.16] Interlocutory Appeal as of Right
- [13.17] Interlocutory Appeal by Permission
- [13.18] Appeal from Order Relating to Traverse or Motion To Dismiss
- [13.19] Appeal from Findings as to Rights of Parties
- [13.20] Appeal from Order Granting New Trial
- [13.21] Appeal from Consent Judgment
- VI. [13.22] Appeal to Illinois Supreme Court
- VII. [13.26] Costs, Expenses, and Reasonable Attorneys’ Fees
- VIII. [13.27] Conclusion
- Index
- List of Forms
- William L. Broom III
William L. Broom III
William L. Broom III is a Partner at Barrett, Twomey, Broom, Hughes & Hoke, LLP, in Carbondale, where he concentrates his practice in civil litigation, estate planning, and eminent domain. He has been a Special Assistant Attorney for the Illinois Department of Transportation for eminent domain and land acquisition since 1983. He is active in the Illinois State Bar Association and has served as Chair of its Committees on Professional Responsibility, Healthcare, and Continuing Legal Education. He is also a member of the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice, and the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association. Mr. Broom received his B.S. from the University of Illinois and his J.D. from the University of Illinois College of Law.
- Leo N. Cinquino
Leo N. Cinquino
Leo N. Cinquino is a member of Righeimer Martin & Cinquino, P.C., in Chicago, where he concentrates his practice in eminent domain litigation. He served for 11 years as a Special Assistant Attorney General for the State of Illinois for eminent domain cases. He is a member of the American, Illinois State, and Chicago Bar Associations. He has lectured for the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, the International Right of Way Association, the Society of Municipal Engineers, ISBA, and IICLE® and was editor of the 1992, 1994, and 1996 supplements to Frank S. Righeimer, Jr., EMINENT DOMAIN IN ILLINOIS (Callaghan). Mr. Cinquino is a graduate of Loyola University Chicago School of Law.
- Richard F. Friedman
Richard F. Friedman
Richard F. Friedman is a Member of the managing group at Neal & Leroy, LLC, in Chicago, where he concentrates his practice in eminent domain, land use, litigation, and historic preservation. He has been the principal attorney in over 100 appeals. Mr. Friedman teaches historic preservation law at the University of Chicago Law School and in the historic preservation graduate program at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. He received his B.S. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and his J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School.
- Michele S. Gonzales
Michele S. Gonzales
Michele S. Gonzalesis a Partner at Elle Law Group, LLC, in Oak Park, where she devotes her practice to eminent domain and complex commercial litigation. Ms. Gonzales is Special Assistant Attorney General and a member of the Illinois State and Chicago Bar Associations. Ms. Gonzales received her undergraduate degree from the University of Chicago and her J.D. from IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, where she was on the Dean’s Honor List, a member of Moot Court, a legal writing assistant, and a research assistant.
- George C. Hupp, Sr.
George C. Hupp, Sr.
No bio available.
- Richard A. Redmond
Richard A. Redmond
Richard A. Redmond is a Partner with Holland & Knight LLP, in Chicago, where he represents clients in eminent domain, regulatory takings, land use, environmental, and other real estate-related litigation. In addition to representing private property owners, he provides legal services to governmental entities, including municipalities and state agencies, in his capacity as a Special Assistant to the Illinois Attorney General. Mr. Redmond also provides advice to lawyers and law firms on professional ethics. Mr. Redmond has served on the Illinois Supreme Court Committee on Professional Responsibility since 1983. He is a member of the American Bar Association Section of Litigation, Eminent Domain Committee, and of the Illinois State and Chicago Bar Associations. He received his B.A. with honors from the University of Notre Dame and his J.D. from Cornell Law School.
- Patricia A. Small
Patricia A. Small
Patricia A. Small is an associate with the firm Barrett, Twomey, Broom, Hughes & Hoke, LLP, in Carbondale, where she concentrates her practice in civil and appellate litigation and eminent domain matters. She has served as a Special Assistant Attorney General for land acquisition and real estate matters since 1996. She is a former law clerk for Chief Justice William C. Hastings of the Nebraska Supreme Court and is a member of the American Bar Association and Illinois State Bar Association. She is a contributing author to EMINENT DOMAIN PRACTICE (IICLE®, 2020). She received her B.S. from the University of Nebraska — Omaha and her J.D. from the University of Nebraska College of Law.
- Mark J. Steger
Mark J. Steger
Mark J. Steger is Senior Counsel at Clark Hill PLC, in Chicago, where he focuses on environmental law. He has been named a Leading Lawyer. Mr. Steger received his B.S. and his M.S. from the University of Illinois and his J.D. from Seattle University School of Law.
- Harry J. Sterling
Harry J. Sterling
No bio available.
- Valerie Moehle Umholtz
Valerie Moehle Umholtz
No bio available.
- Joseph B. VanFleet
Joseph B. VanFleet
Joseph B. VanFleet is a Partner at Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC, in Peoria, where he concentrates his practice in business litigation. He is a member of the American and Illinois State Bar Associations and the American Inns of Court. Mr. VanFleet received his B.S. with high honors from the University of Illinois and his J.D. from the University of Illinois College of Law.
- Emily H. Wilburn
Emily H. Wilburn
Emily H. Wilburn is an associate at Quinn, Johnston, Henderson, Pretorius & Cerulo in Peoria, where she concentrates her practice in commercial litigation, creditors’ rights, construction, probabe, real estate disputes, and medical malpractice. She is a member of the Peoria County Bar Association, serving as the Chair for the association’s Brown Bag Luncheon CLE series for several years, and of the Abraham Lincoln Inns of Court. Ms. Wilburn received her B.A. summa cum laude from the University of Tennessee and her J.D. cum laude from the University of Tennessee College of Law, where she was the Executive Student Materials Editor for the Tennessee Law Review.
- Robert J. Will
Robert J. Will
Robert J. Will is a Member of Lewis Rice LLC in St. Louis, where he concentrates his practice in matters related trust and estate litigation, commercial litigation, class actions, and condemnation. He is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation and a member of the Illinois State Bar Association. He currently serves as Cochair for the American Bar Association’s Pretrial Practice and Discovery Committee and is a former Cochair of the ABA’s committees on Homeless Experience Legal Protection, Trust and Estate Litigation, and Zoning and Land Use. Mr. Will received his B.A. summa cum laude from Saint Louis University and his J.D. with high honors and Order of the Coif from George Washington University Law School.
Eminent Domain Practice (Illinois) (ARCHIVED 2013 EDITION)
An IICLE® Online Library subscription is required to view this content. For more information or to subscribe, click here. If you are a current Online Library subscriber, please log in to access this title.
Free monthly e-updates in 15 practice areas