All about greed with the Nemers

[bigham78]

I caught this over at Rasor blogAccording to someone present at the trial, Joe Nemer is asking the jury to award him $3 million for his property.The university has offered $1.038 million, which is reportedly above fair-market value.I guess $3 million is the point where it stops being about principles.This has been about greed from day one from the cousins Manny and Joe. Here's hoping the jury awards Joe the 1.038 mil UofA has offered for his dump of a property.I just toured the area a couple of days and ago and Manny and Joe are insane demanding that kind of cash for their dumps they call businesses that attract more bums and derelicts then UofA students.

[billcro69]

looks like he got it, too http://www.akronnewsnow.com/news/itemdetai...Ordered_To_Pay_

[Lee Adams]

I caught this over at Rasor blogAccording to someone present at the trial, Joe Nemer is asking the jury to award him $3 million for his property.The university has offered $1.038 million, which is reportedly above fair-market value.I guess $3 million is the point where it stops being about principles.This has been about greed from day one from the cousins Manny and Joe. Here's hoping the jury awards Joe the 1.038 mil UofA has offered for his dump of a property.I just toured the area a couple of days and ago and Manny and Joe are insane demanding that kind of cash for their dumps they call businesses that attract more bums and derelicts then UofA students.

what a great place...AMERICA...the almighty dollar is our god!

[RowdyZip]

I caught this over at Rasor blogAccording to someone present at the trial, Joe Nemer is asking the jury to award him $3 million for his property.The university has offered $1.038 million, which is reportedly above fair-market value.I guess $3 million is the point where it stops being about principles.This has been about greed from day one from the cousins Manny and Joe. Here's hoping the jury awards Joe the 1.038 mil UofA has offered for his dump of a property.I just toured the area a couple of days and ago and Manny and Joe are insane demanding that kind of cash for their dumps they call businesses that attract more bums and derelicts then UofA students.

what a great place...AMERICA...the almighty dollar is our god!

RIDICULOUS RIDICULOUS RIDICULOUS!! Someone tell me how that crap is worth 3 mill? Did they think they were supposed to appraise the value for when the stadium is directly behind it? :blink: :blink: :puke:Oh, and thanks for the link, Bill. Nice to see you on here during a non-K-S-U week!

[GoZips88]

Damn it ... I sure wish I'd been given a chance to be on that jury.

[ZachTheZip]

3 freaking million dollars?!? For that POS shack? Are you kidding me?

[skip-zip]

Being somewhat sympathtic, these guys had well-established businesses get uprooted. I'm not sure how you put a dollar value on that, but I think their loss should be compensated.I know...some of you younger folks are thinking about how this affects tuition (I was there once). But, they should be compensated for their loss, if the U really wants these parcels (and they do).

[bigham78]

I'm a much, much older person and that jury is nuts. Those businesses are not even close to being worth 2.7 million. That jury looked at more what UofA could pay and not the actual value of the land and the business. Notice Manny is licking his chops about his upcoming trial and not about the I'm not moving stance. This is about greed for property owners getting far more then their property and business are worth.Cmon give me a break. 500,000 each for shared parking lot whose tax value is listed at less then 175,000 UofA offered. 2.1 million for rest of those falling dump businesses that cater to assorted bums and derelicts these days. This was not justice. This was a jury looking more at UofA and what they could afford and not what the businesses were actually worth.

[timmyboy]

I know that the university was trying to work out a deal that would have given them land on another portion of campus in exchange for their land. If i were the university i would not give them anything. its outrageous that they were awarded almost double of what the actual value of their land was. The landlord who took his case to court was awarded $315,350, which was what the university offered them and was also far more then what their land was appraised at. What makes manny and his clan so special to award them almost double the appraised value? sure, they are being asked to move from that run down, drug infested skum bar of his.........but this landlord was also "pushed" out of his property and only got fair value for his land!

[GoZips]

Looks like an appeal is the next option.Their lawyers obviously knew how to pick a jury. Wonder how many of the jury frequent those rat holes.

[goodthts]

Looks like an appeal is the next option.Their lawyers obviously knew how to pick a jury. Wonder how many of the jury frequent those rat holes.

Friggin ridiculous!!! Wonder how many of the jurors will now have bar tabs for free? People are just not smart in this day and age. And being from the customer service realm, i know.OR....you could say Manny the Moocher is a genius. Now he is set for the rest of his life and his family. Anyone have an idea what his new digs will look like?

[zen]

Being somewhat sympathtic, these guys had well-established businesses get uprooted. I'm not sure how you put a dollar value on that, but I think their loss should be compensated.I know...some of you younger folks are thinking about how this affects tuition (I was there once). But, they should be compensated for their loss, if the U really wants these parcels (and they do).

I'm in this camp, but if I was on the jury, I would have recommended no more than 50% above market appraisal or 50% above cost to locate the business to a spot of equal or better business opportunity, not 3mill.In other words, you don't just say "Here's what your land is worth, now take a hike!" just because you got the government involved. Okay, I can't give my neighbor the appraised property value and then kick them out. My neighbor has rights. People need to be compensated above what your appraise their property for, for a variety of reasons.1) They have to move. There are many expenses involved.2) They have to move. It puts them out of business for a time.3) They have to move. The new property could cost more than what their existing one is appraised for.4) They have to move. Their new property may not even be as advantageous to their business as the old one.5) They actually owned that property. Hello, McFly. I know that there are limitations to ownership rights, but you can't just bump people because you want to.The point is that THEY HAVE TO MOVE, and they should be compensated for the fact that THEY HAVE TO MOVE, not just for the value of the property that you are TAKING away from them.But I also think that there should be some (nothing major) degree of punitive effect, not just compensatory. I think giving them 3Mill is overboard, but I don't think they should have just been given street value either.

[bigham78]

Being somewhat sympathtic, these guys had well-established businesses get uprooted. I'm not sure how you put a dollar value on that, but I think their loss should be compensated.I know...some of you younger folks are thinking about how this affects tuition (I was there once). But, they should be compensated for their loss, if the U really wants these parcels (and they do).

I'm in this camp, but if I was on the jury, I would have recommended no more than 50% above market appraisal or 50% above cost to locate the business to a spot of equal or better business opportunity, not 3mill.In other words, you don't just say "Here's what your land is worth, now take a hike!" just because you got the government involved. Okay, I can't give my neighbor the appraised property value and then kick them out. My neighbor has rights. People need to be compensated above what your appraise their property for, for a variety of reasons.1) They have to move. There are many expenses involved.2) They have to move. It puts them out of business for a time.3) They have to move. The new property could cost more than what their existing one is appraised for.4) They have to move. Their new property may not even be as advantageous to their business as the old one.5) They actually owned that property. Hello, McFly. I know that there are limitations to ownership rights, but you can't just bump people because you want to.The point is that THEY HAVE TO MOVE, and they should be compensated for the fact that THEY HAVE TO MOVE, not just for the value of the property that you are TAKING away from them.But I also think that there should be some (nothing major) degree of punitive effect, not just compensatory. I think giving them 3Mill is overboard, but I don't think they should have just been given street value either.

3 mil is obscene. I just use the shared parking lot. Summit county tax record places the value of that part of the property at just over 100,000. They jury award Joe Nemer 500,000 and Manny 500,000 for parking lot not even worth 200,000. If, you're going to use eniment domain. You must offer more then the appraised value of the property, estimated businesses losses and moving expenses and you must offer that on the high side. That's why UofA faired so well with the Mangan's for their property when they went to court and got what UofA offered.Check the Summit county tax records for the properties Joe and Mona Nemer own and you'll see the jury far exceed the worth. The parking lot alone drives that home. 1 mil for a small parking lot not even worth 200,000 says this jury looked at what UofA was able to pay and not what the property was worth. $1,005,168.00 to be the compensation for the taking of the property known as 437 East Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio. That's the parking lot that Joe and Manny jointly own. I could see giving Joe and Manny the 175,000 to 200,000 each for the parking lot. But, 1 mil combined I knew this was headed in the wrong direction when UofA had to make motions about bringing into the trial about what they paid for Quaker Square. The lawyers for the Nemers brought up what they paid for other properties in the past and that swayed this jury to give this obscene judgement. Hate to repeat myself. But, this was made more about what UofA could pay and not the actual property and business worth.

[Captain Kangaroo]

Build the stadium...let the properties sit there...and let Nemer pay taxes on 3million dollars for a few years.So much for the stadium being under budget.

[g-mann17]

Build the stadium...let the properties sit there...and let Nemer pay taxes on 3million dollars for a few years.So much for the stadium being under budget.

Well for the budget portion, the acquisition of the property would go under the dorm budget, and not the stadium budget But yeah, I say let them see what it's like to own multi-million dollar property for a while. I couldn't believe the decision on this. How a judge doesn't say, "This is exorbinant and you need to go back and think again on this" I will never know.

[w00t]

Unbelievable.He should have been awarded slightly below market value on the grounds that UA did him a favor by forcing him to construct new buildings for his businesses that don't smell like stale falafel, cigarette smoke, and cat piss.

[g-mann17]

Unbelievable.He should have been awarded slightly below market value on the grounds that UA did him a favor by forcing him to construct new buildings for his businesses that don't smell like stale falafel, cigarette smoke, and cat piss.

Hahahahaha

[bigham78]

Build the stadium...let the properties sit there...and let Nemer pay taxes on 3million dollars for a few years.So much for the stadium being under budget.

Well for the budget portion, the acquisition of the property would go under the dorm budget, and not the stadium budget But yeah, I say let them see what it's like to own multi-million dollar property for a while. I couldn't believe the decision on this. How a judge doesn't say, "This is exorbinant and you need to go back and think again on this" I will never know.

That's good question as Judge Spicer showed the Mangan's in that ruling earlier this year giving them what UofA offered. IMO, UofA only chance on appeal is the parking lot. $1,005,168.00 to be the compensation for the taking of the property known as 437 East Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio. No way Manny and Joe have been paying Summit County property taxes equal to what they got for the shared parking lot alone.

[zipdiehard]

It will never happen, but now that the court has set the value of the property, does the city, county or state go after them for the appropriate taxes?

[bigham78]

It will never happen, but now that the court has set the value of the property, does the city, county or state go after them for the appropriate taxes?

I wish they would. I'm sure the tax bill for property known as 437 East Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio was not being assessed at $1,005,168.00 which is what Joe and Manny got for the shared parking lot. Everyone that's cheering the Nemers over at the ABJ needs to stop and think for a second. They were paying taxes on 437 East Exchange Street for property valued somewhere along 125,000 to 150,000 and just got $1,005,168.00 for that property. IMO, that almost 10 times what the property is worth and it's hardly fair market value. That alone should be reduce on appeal IMO. Unlikely, but would be nice if it was.

[GoZips88]

Oh to have been a fly on the wall in that jury room. Would have also been interesting to see how the attorneys weeded out the jury pool to agree on the group they got. It seems like the vast majority of the people in this area could give a Rat's about the U of A. How do those of you on this board think a jury would have decided had this been tOSU vs. rat-hole/ASSfault owners in Columbus, OH? Any chance the jury selection process would have been a little harder for the plaintiff? I'll bet the jury would have GIVEN the property to tOSU and forced the property owners to be taken away in scarlet and gray. For whatever reason, it just seems like more people than not in this area look down their noses at 'Akron U.'

[Zip_ME87]

Actually what amazes me in jury cases like this is the stupidity of jurors who don't realize that Ohio taxpayers, including them, are the people who foot the bill. Keep on awarding ridiculous settlements like this and then ask why Ohio's taxes and in-state tuition are so high.

[zen]

What amazes me is how often I see people in politics and life always finding sooooo many rationalizations to legitimzie their viewpoint... but the viewpoint always stands. It's the core.Taxes blah blah blah.I guarantee you that if Akron (or the State or whoever) was using eminent domain to put a highway straight through the middle of campus, eminent domain would be evil, and all different types of rationalizations would be used to legitimize that viewpoint.Can we be honest here. We want a football stadium. We root for it like fans and we take it personal that the university has to payout to property owners. It is what it is. I honestly would have taken any offer from the university that was significantly higher than market value, but that's just me. You have the right to fight it, and they won. Sux to be us.

[Big Zip]

How about we really be honest here -- we are talking about a Democratic town that votes Democratic every chance they get. Democrats are the party of what can the government do for me and how can I put the responibility on someone else. As I was reading this article the first thing that occured to me is what someone else posted -- if the dump is worth that much then why wasn't he paying taxes on that much. I'm all for giving him the money he deserves, but I want to know when the property became that value and I want back taxes for the city. They are the people who brought this case on themselves they should get the good with the bad.

[bigham78]

How about we really be honest here -- we are talking about a Democratic town that votes Democratic every chance they get. Democrats are the party of what can the government do for me and how can I put the responibility on someone else. As I was reading this article the first thing that occured to me is what someone else posted -- if the dump is worth that much then why wasn't he paying taxes on that much. I'm all for giving him the money he deserves, but I want to know when the property became that value and I want back taxes for the city. They are the people who brought this case on themselves they should get the good with the bad.

I'm all for a property owner getting the fair market value for his or her property. But, $1,005,168.00 for that property known as 437 East Exchange Street a parking lot shared by the business is absurd. That's ten times the tax assessed value of the property. I can see double split between Joe and Manny or even 2.5 times the tax assessed value. I don't understand them getting 10 times the the tax assessed value of that parcel. I may have been able to deal with the other 2.1 mil which includes moving expenses, loss business revenue and property value, if the jury hadn't lost their minds giving just over a million for crappy parking lot.