Skip to main content
Case Studies

Consultative Expertise

By March 6, 2013January 15th, 2019No Comments


When the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) in Seattle, Washington announced plans to seize two subdivision lots on an inlet to the Pacific Ocean, a property owner within that subdivision did not know where to turn. Two local attorneys with eminent domain experience did not see sufficient basis for a claim and subsequently declined to represent the owner in his attempt to seek fair compensation for the proposed seizure. Frustrated and in need of experienced counsel in the highly specialized eminent domain arena, the owner put in a call to Ackerman Ackerman Complete & Dynkowski.


As a condemnation and eminent domain law firm with demonstrated expertise in this field of law, Ackerman Ackerman Complete & Dynkowski regularly consults with out-of-state attorneys to achieve positive outcomes on prominent eminent domain cases. Over the years, the firm has personally handled or assisted others in obtaining additional compensation ranging from small increases to multi-million-dollar awards—not just in Michigan, Florida, Ohio and the District of Columbia where the firm’s partners are licensed to practice law, but also in a number of states where it is not licensed.

Upon reviewing the Seattle case, Ackerman Ackerman Complete & Dynkowski determined that the loss of subdivision restrictions and the taking of lots for a new roadway entitled the property owner to significant compensation. After first contacting the Owners’ Counsel of America member representative for Washington State and offering him the case, Ackerman Ackerman Complete & Dynkowski subsequently provided the skeptical attorney with a detailed research memo. Happily, the basic preparation of the claim that was outlined by Ackerman Ackerman Complete & Dynkowski was found to be convincing, and the precise cases cited by the firm supporting the existence of a claim were relied upon by the State of Washington King County Superior Court Judge. The property owner ultimately received a $1,500,000 settlement compensating him for the seizure, an outcome that would not have transpired without Ackerman Ackerman Complete & Dynkowski’s central consultative role in preparing the legal arguments upon which the case was ultimately decided.