|
<br />Hans Ottinot, City Attorney
<br />February 7,2008
<br />Page 5
<br />
<br />should award Respondent not more than $3,750,000 as the fee simple market value and $3,100,000
<br />for the leased fee value of Parcell as full compensation for the City's acquisition of ParcelL It is
<br />important, however, to understand that jury trials can be and often are very complex and
<br />unpredictable. There are many dynamics in any given case that could sway a jury to "split the baby"
<br />or give an extreme verdict. It is not outside the realm of reasonableness that a jury in this case might
<br />award Respondents between six million and seven million dollars for Parcel 1.
<br />
<br />RESPONDENTS' PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OFFER
<br />
<br />Since last week Respondent have apparently deemed it prudent to offer the City the prospect of
<br />resolving this lawsuit on the basis of the City's payment of $7,000,000 to Respondents. This amount
<br />includes not only the value of Parcel 1, but also all sums due to Respondents for prejwlgment
<br />interest, attorneys' fees and cost incurred as a result of this eminent domain lawsuit.
<br />
<br />In my earlier letter opinion I suggest to you that resolving this case at a figure representing a 25%
<br />margin above the fee simple value of Parcell ($3,750,000) would yield a reasonable negotiated
<br />settlement amount of about $4,687,500.00. The present offer by Respondent, however, should be
<br />looked upon favorably because it includes a reasonable amount for the market value of Parcel 1 at
<br />$5,250,000.00. Based upon this amount, the compensable amount due to Respondents, which
<br />represents pr~judgment interest is approximately $896,000,00. This number is based upon simple
<br />interest calcuktions for the period beginning With the City deposit of funds representing its good
<br />faith estimate of value and time in ,final judgment is reached. Please note that the interest rate used
<br />is based upon Florida Statutes has progressively changed every year since 2005, the :first year of the
<br />, taking.
<br />
<br />I also proffer that th~ attorney fees due to Respondent is also calculated in accordance with a
<br />benefits definition and established formuk that is also enumerated in the Florida Statutes which
<br />govem the award of attorneys fees in eminent domain cases. The amount associated with the
<br />attomeys fees in this cased based upon the ''benefits analysis" and the resulting statutory formula is
<br />approximately $806,000.00. The remaining compensable amount due to Respondents typically
<br />would be their costs - usually the amount incurred to retain real estate appraisers, engineers,
<br />architects, planners and others. But this amount also includes some typical cost incurred such long
<br />distance phone calls, certain travel items, facsimile, courier, certain copying costs, and the cost of
<br />depositions transcripts and court reporters who transcribe hearings and depositions.
<br />
<br />In the proposed $7,000,000.00 settlement amount includes the sum of (a) the ~arket value of Parcel
<br />1- $5,250,000, (b) prejudgment interest - $896,000 and (c) attorneys fees - $806,000 which totals
<br />$6,952,000. Although this would effectively leave Respondents with roughly $48,0000 to pay its
<br />costs, the actual allocation of the $7,000,000.00 is not City's responsibility since Respondent has
<br />agreed to accept an all inclusive amount.
<br />
<br />In addition to the fact that the amount proposed is within the reasonable limits of what you might
<br />expect a jury to decide, the settlement also represents a cessation of the added prejudgment interest
<br />expense, which is currently being computed at the statutory rate of 11 %. Other costs and savings to
<br />
<br />FTLpOCS 5289886 1
<br />
<br />MIAMI
<br />
<br />FORT LAUDERDALE
<br />
<br />smms & BOWEN LLP
<br />WEST PALM BEACH ORLANDO TAMPA
<br />
<br />TALLAHASSEE
<br />
<br />AMSTERDAM
<br />
<br />LONDON
<br />
|