Real Estate and Construction Disputes

Real Estate and Construction Litigation Handled by Steve McNichols

adobe_acrobat_icon Download in PDF

  • Represented a commercial developer against the U.S. Army for contaminating the developer’s property. The Army base had a defective sewer pipe that ran through the developer’s property. Obtained a settlement that compensated our client for the added cost of construction incurred in cleaning up the contamination.
  • Binding arbitration award on behalf of the owner of undeveloped property in an action against a developer for breach of an option agreement. The award exceeded $1 million and included all of our client’s attorneys’ fees and costs.
  • Recovered over $8,800,000 in liquidated damages, attorney fees and costs against a New York Stock Exchange, publically traded developer and home builder that refused to close on the final phase of a $241,500,000 contract with our clients for the sale of raw land. The refusal to close took place after the 2007 crash of the real estate market. The developer claimed that it was not required to close because the sellers had breached the contract. The United States district Court held in favor of our clients.
  • Represented the purchasers of developed acreage in an action against a real estate broker for fraud and failure to disclose. Obtained a combination of settlement and a jury verdict in excess of $1 million, including $500,000 in punitive damages.
  • Defense verdict in a court trial defending an attorney/real estate broker who was a principal in a partnership that owned commercial real estate. The partnership was sued by purchasers of the property who claimed that the defendant failed to disclose that the ground water under the property was contaminated and that the City would require a use permit in order to operate a restaurant on the property.
  • Successfully defended the owners of a retail shopping center from an action by a multitude of tenants. The tenants alleged that they had been induced by fraudulent representations to sign leases for the shopping center while it was being built. They further claimed that the owners of the shopping center failed to properly operate the shopping center. Most of the tenants claimed that they had lost their life savings when their businesses failed.
  • Judgment after a court trial in the United States District Court on behalf of the owners of ranches in an action against the United States Army for trespass and nuisance. The trespass and nuisance consisted of shelling and bombing of the plaintiffs’ agricultural properties.

Back to Resources