Emily Louise Madueno

Emily Louise Madueno

0.0
Not yet reviewed Write a Review
Rating: 7.7

Licensed for 18 years

Real estate Lawyer at Costa Mesa, CA
Practice Areas: Real Estate

650 Town Center Drive, Suite 550, Costa Mesa, CA

About Emily

Biography

Practice Areas

1

Practice Area

Real Estate 100%

Eminent Domain

18 years

100%

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer


Looking for an attorney? Avvo can help.

search module image

Search our directory

Quickly connect with top attorneys through our legal directory to get help with your legal issue.

chat module image

Avvo's live chat agents can help coordinate a consultation with a local attorney.

Chat with a live agent who can match you with the right attorney for your legal needs.

Chat with

Licenses

Licensed in California for 18 years

State: California

Acquired: 2007

Active

No misconduct found

Location

Murphy & Evertz LLP

650 Town Center Drive, Suite 550, Costa Mesa, CA, 92626

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Emily Louise Madueno's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

0.0 /5.0

Not Yet Reviewed

Emily Louise Madueno's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Emily

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't received any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

Jennifer Riel McClure headshot
Jennifer McClure

Unknown lawyer

Experience

Rating:  7.7 (Very Good)

Work Experience

2013 - Present

Partner, Murphy & Evertz LLP

2010 - 2013

Associate, Murphy & Evertz LLP

2007 - 2010

Associate, Luce Forward Hamilton & Scripps

2006 - 2006

Summer Associate, Holland & Knight

Associations

2017 - Present

International Right-of-Way Association Chapter 57

President

2007 - Present

Federalist Society

Member

2007 - Present

Orange County Bar Association

Member

2007 - Present

International Right of Way Association

Member

2016 - 2017

International Right-of-Way Association Chapter 57

President-Elect

2015 - 2016

International Right-of-Way Association Chapter 57

Treasurer

2014 - 2015

Chapter 57 International Right of Way Association

Secretary

Sample of Legal Cases

City of Lake Forest v. Alexander S. Rados, Trustee

The City valued just compensation for the expert exchange at $6.665 million. The case settled for $15.4 million.

Caltrans v. Javad N. Sani, M.D., & Parvin Nahvi, M.D.

Caltrans ultimately agreed to pay $6,440,000 for full takes of two of the parcels, preserving the owners’ ability to seek compensation for the taking of, and damages to, the third parcel.

San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District v. Mentone Citrus Growers

The case settled for $6 million to Mentone.

People of the State of California, by and through the Department of Transportation v. Westminster Lodging, Inc.

Caltrans initially offered $84,000. The case settled a few weeks before the jury trial was to begin for total compensation of $4.6 million to our client.

People of the State of California, by and through the Department of Transportation v. Renfroe, et al.

After two partial abandonments by Caltrans, the Court awarded our client litigation expenses and the case settled favorably for our client.

Bay City Partners LLC adv. City of Seal Beach

Bay City Partners LLC obtained settlement worth up to $2 million, plus the City’s cooperation in further entitlements for the property.

Bay City Partners LLC adv. City of Seal Beach

Bay City Partners LLC obtained settlement worth up to $2 million, plus the City’s cooperation in further entitlements for the property.

Roll Properties LLC and Carmenita SFS Property LLC adv. Caltrans

After establishing the necessity for a full take, the case settled for $25.5 million, while preserving the client’s ability to seek substantial additional precondemnation damages and reimbursement of environmental remediation offsets.

Fresno Unified School District v. International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, et al.

The District initially offered $410,000. The case settled for total just compensation of $1,350,000 for our clients.

People of the State of California, by and through the Department of Transportation v. Altmans, et al.

The case settled one week before the jury trial was to begin for total compensation of $7.85 million to our client.

City of La Puente Redevelopment Agency v. Gudzunas, et al.

Our team negotiated a lost rent agreement which insulated our client from any loss of income during the litigation. The case then settled on the eve of jury trial for total compensation of $6.2 million to our client.

See More Legal Cases

Education

2007

Loyola Law School, Loyola Marymount University

J.D.

2004

California State University, Northridge

B.A.

Speaking Engagements

2014

Chapter 57 Education Seminar and Casino Night Fundraiser

How Fast Food Restaurants are Impacted by Public Projects

2011

IRWA Annual International Education Conference, Atlanta, Georgia

Surplus Property Disposition: How to Win the Game for Your Agency . . . And Stay Out of Jail

2011

Appraisal Institute Spring Litigation Conference, Woodside, CA

Square Pegs, Round Holes, Easy Targets: Valuing Special Use Property In Eminent Domain

2009

IRWA Chapter 57 Education Seminar and Casino Night Fundraiser

2019: Two Visions of the Next Ten Years in Eminent Domain and Public Acquisitions

2009

Chapter 57 Meeting, Riverside, CA

Clear, Simple, and Wrong? The Rules on Environmental Contamination in Eminent Domain

Publications

2012

Murphy & Evertz E-Alert City of Corona v. Liston Brick Co. of Corona: Keep Your Incompetent Evidence Out Of the Courtroom!

2012

Murphy & Evertz E Alert City of Livermore v. Baca: Groucho Marx and Severance Damages

2011

Murphy & Evertz E-Alert Owner’s Silence in the Face of Lender’s Withdrawal of the Deposit Does Not Equal Waiver of Owner’s Claims and Defenses

2011

Murphy & Evertz E-Alert Can Having A Plan Qualify As Bad Planning? Public Agency Proves It Lacks A ‘Plan,’ and Dodges Precondemnation Damages Liability, Despite Its Acquisition Program

2010

Murphy & Evertz E-Alert Is That Your Final Offer? Agencies Beware A Final Offer Amounting to Less Than 60% Of The Compensation Awarded”

2010

Murphy & Evertz E Alert Inverse Condemnation: Does A Buyer’s Prior Knowledge Mean No Recovery?

2009

Legal e-Update An Oral Contract Worth More Than the Paper It’s Not Written On? Lack of a Written Lease Not Fatal to a Tenant’s Claim for Lost Business Goodwill

2009

Continuing Education of the Bar, 2d ed Condemnation chapter in Ground Lease Practice

2009

San Diego Daily Transcript Ready . . . Fire . . . Aim!: California Appeals Court Rejects Vague and Overbroad Resolutions of Necessity

2008

Legal e-Update California Appeals Court Holds City Liable for ‘Temporary’ Development Ban

2008

Legal e-Update Don’t Let the Door Hit You on Your Way Out: Federal Court Door Closed to Inverse Condemnation Actions Against the State

2008

Legal e-Update Proper Dates of Value in Eminent Domain: The Waters Get Less Muddy - California Supreme Court Orders RV Communities Depublished

2008

Legal e-Update Temporary Severance Damages Only to Compensate for Actual Damages

2008

Legal e-Update County’s Alleged Breach of Contract Does Not Equal Condemnation

2007

40 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 809 The Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause: Public Use and Private Use; Unfortunately, There Is No Difference

Languages

English

Avvo Rating

Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.

What determines Avvo Rating?
  • Experience & background Years licensed, work experience, education
  • Legal community recognition Peer endorsements, associations, awards
  • Legal thought leadership Publications, speaking engagements
  • Discipline Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.
Avvo Rating Levels
10.0 - 9.0 Superb8.9 - 8.0 Excellent7.9 - 7.0 Very Good6.9 - 6.0 Good5.9 - 5.0 Average4.9 - 4.0 Concern3.9 - 3.0 Caution2.9 - 2.0 Strong Caution1.9 - 1.0 Extreme Caution