Rick Friess is the Chair of Nossaman's Eminent Domain and Valuation Practice Group, among the largest in California. He has a proven track record as a successful trial attorney and has represented both landowners and public agencies in some of the biggest, multi-million dollar cases in the state. With 19 years of real estate litigation experience – and an emphasis on eminent domain and inverse condemnation – Mr. Friess is adept at negotiating creative and valuable settlements for his clients. Given his comprehensive perspective on eminent domain, clients frequently seek his advice on strategic planning regarding land acquisition before litigation arises.
Representative Work
Winchester 700 LLC v. Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority Represented the owner of a 454-acre property in Riverside County that the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (commonly known as the "RCA") had deemed necessary for conservation as part of its Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Having determined it would acquire Winchester's property, the RCA caused the processing of Winchester's development entitlements to be frozen, but the RCA never made a specific offer to purchase. Under threat of an inverse condemnation action, Mr. Friess negotiated a valuation/acquisition process with the RCA. Under that process, Mr. Friess represented Winchester in an arbitration in which the RCA presented appraisal testimony of a value below $30 million. After the completion of the arbitration, but before the award was issued, the parties reached a settlement by which the RCA paid more than $70 million.
Makar Properties v. City of Huntington Beach Represented developer Makar Properties against the City of Huntington Beach in connection with a dispute regarding the value of Makar's Huntington Beach property. The valuation impacted the eventual park-in-lieu fee Makar would be required to pay. The parties were nearly $50 million apart in their valuation figures. After an arbitration, the three judge panel awarded a value exactly at Makar's appraisal testimony. This equates to a $20 million savings in park fees for Makar.
Val Verde Unified School District v. Perris Valley 50 SFR, LLC Represented a development company prior to condemnation of a third of the company's undeveloped 180-acre subdivision. A multi-pronged approach, including litigating, lobbying, and negotiating successfully persuaded the District that just compensation for the property was many times higher than their original offer. The matter settled, and the client received $48 million in lieu of condemnation.
Los Angeles Unified School District. Represented the District in over 20 condemnation actions by which the District acquired parcels for several different school projects. The representation included resolution of complicated valuation and title issues.
- Los Angeles Unified School District v. PC Crown Hill Represented the District in an action to condemn 5 acres of vacant land for a new high school. The land is adjacent to downtown Los Angeles, and the owners valued it at over $13 million. The case involved complex valuation issues, including the impact of development constraints, such as severely hilly topography and an abandoned subway tunnel, and entitlement limitations. The matter settled for millions of dollars below the owners' claimed value.
- Los Angeles Unified School District v. Meruelo Maddux Properties Represented LAUSD in connection with the condemnation of a vacant, 24-acre industrial property (a former rail yard) for the construction of a new high school. In addition to the condemnation-related issues, the historic use of the property as a rail yard meant that the litigation encompassed myriad unique issues, including issues of contamination, overlapping easements, and undocumented encroachments. After two years of heated litigation, including a court trial on a right-to-take challenge, the matter resolved at a mediation shortly before a scheduled jury trial over the valuation of the property. The settlement, for $50 million, was tens of millions of dollars less than the developer's appraiser's valuation.
San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency. Represented a joint powers agency in connection with the condemnation of dozens of parcels needed for toll road right of way.
Lake Elsinore Unified School District v. Centex Homes Represented a homebuilding company facing condemnation of 14 acres for development of a new school. The District negotiated a contract to purchase the property for a few million dollars, allowed the contract to lapse, then filed a condemnation action. The action claimed soil problems lowered the value of the property to $3 million. The soils claim was successfully challenged, and the client agreed to a negotiated settlement of $8 million.
People of the State of California v. Imperial Terrace Represented the owner of a 40-unit apartment building condemned by Caltrans for a highway realignment. After trial, a jury returned a verdict in favor of the client. The client received $9.5 million for the property, nearly 75 percent more than the public agency's initial offer.
The Metropolitan Water District v. First Industrial Realty Trust Represented First Industrial in a condemnation action brought by the MWD to acquire a portion of an industrial parcel owned by First Industrial. The litigation ended with a negotiated settlement roughly ten times the amount MWD originally offered to First Industrial.
Alameda Corridor-East Transportation Authority v. Hartlieb Trust Represented the owner of a commercial property condemned for a grade-separation project. In its condemnation action, the Authority sought limited interests in the property, but actual construction greatly exceeded those interests. Subsequently filed a separate suit for inverse condemnation and tort causes of action. The dispute ended with a negotiated settlement in which the Authority agreed to acquire the entire property for $3.55 million, seven times the initial offer for the partial acquisition.
Long Beach Redevelopment Agency v. Walker Trust Represented the owner of a commercial property being condemned for a redevelopment project. Dispute ended with a negotiated settlement of $3.5 million, more than double the Agency's original offer.
La Mirada Redevelopment Agency v. Byon Represented the owners of two businesses — a preschool and a choir group — whose property was threatened with condemnation for a redevelopment project. Prior to the filing of the condemnation action, the dispute was resolved with a global settlement of $1.3 million, more than 175 percent of the Agency's initial offer.
People ex rel. Department of Transportation v. Woodson (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 954 Represented owners of a mobile home park who faced an eminent domain action by Caltrans. The clients won a jury verdict, but the trial judge did not award attorneys' fees and other litigation expenses. Successfully represented the landowners on appeal. The Court of Appeal reversed the lower court's decision, remanded the case, and awarded full litigation expenses for both the trial court and appellate proceedings to the client.
Caltrans v. Himmelstein Represented property owners in a condemnation action brought by Caltrans to acquire nearly 40 acres. The action went to trial, and the jury's verdict in favor of the client was six times Caltrans' initial offer.
City of Santa Ana v. Nikolic Represented the owner of two non-contiguous properties condemned by the City of Santa Ana. The jury ruled in favor of the client. The verdict award, monetary settlement, and awarded attorneys' fees, totaled $674,000 – more than twice the City's initial offer.
City of Anaheim. Represented the City in a large, complex, inverse-condemnation/tort action, which included two, month-long jury trials. The action arose out of a landslide that was alleged to have damaged dozens of properties, including the complete loss of approximately twenty homes, and involved approximately 100 parties.