Anish J. Banker

Anish J. Banker

Top Rated Family Law Attorney in Irvine, CA
Business Law, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Real Estate, Environment, Eminent Domain
2 Park Plaza, Suite 550, Irvine, CA 92614

    About Anish J. Banker

    Practice Areas
    • Business Law
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Real Estate
    • Environment
    • Eminent Domain
    Education
    • University of San Diego School of Law, San Diego, California, 2001
      J.D.
      • Honors: cum laude
    • University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, 1998
      B.S.
      • Major: Business Administration
      • Honors: cum laude
    • University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, 1998
      B.A.
      • Major: Economics
      • Honors: cum laude
    Representative Cases
    • Pomona Unified School District v. Gateway Triangle Development, LLC — (Initial Offer: $5.5 million; Result: $14.5 million)
    • City of La Mirada v. Majestic Realty — (Initial Offer: $93,000; Result: $2.3 million)
    • Caltrans v. 7301 Artesia Blvd., LLC — (Initial Offer: $301,000; Result: $1.25 million PLUS)
    • Palm Springs Unified School District v. Palm Investment Group — (Initial Offer: $4,446,000; Result: $7.8 million PLUS)
    • OCTA v. Cobblestone 1993, Ltd., et al — (Initial Offer: $2,661,000; Result: $4.7 million)
    • Caltrans v. Capistrano Enterprises, et al — (Initial Offer: $1,049,000; Result: $2 million)
    • Caltrans v. Kardos — (Initial Offer: $176,000; Result: $675,000)
    • Caltrans v. Mike Thompson’s RV — (Initial Offer: $192,000; Result: $1.6 Million)
    • Olivier v. County of San Bernardino, Orange County Transportation Authority and Caltrans — (Initial Offer: $0; Result: $305,000)
    • Sand Canyon Service Station, Inc. v. City of Irvine, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) — (Initial Offer: $0; Result: $300,000)
    • Los Angeles County Metropolitan Authority (MTA) v. Blissful Images, Inc. — (Initial Offer: $38,080; Result: $350,000)
    • Long Beach Redevelopment Agency v. Hit & Miss — (Initial Offer: $97,390; Result: $601,500 PLUS)
    • City of Bakersfield v. Choi — (Initial Offer: $203,670; Result: $333,000)
    • Caltrans v. Hankins — (Initial Offer: $0; Result: $215,000)
    • OCTA v. Lee, et al — (Initial Offer: $59,355; Result: $740,000 PLUS)
    • Healthy Solutions v. City of Newport Beach, Caltrans — (Initial Offer: $0; Result: $455,000)
    • Caltrans v. Newport Diversified, Inc. (Combined Initial Offer: $606,308.00; Result: $6.75 million PLUS)
    Classes and Seminars
    • Speaker, “The RON Process and Obtaining Prejudgment Possession”, IRWA Chapter 57 Seminar (October 12, 2018)
    • Speaker, “Property Acquisition for Public Use: A Focused Look at a Complex Process”, IRWA, 3rd Annual Spring Seminar (April 11, 2019)
    • Speaker, “Resolution of Necessity Hearings – Applicable Law, Practices, Procedures, Pitfalls and Precautions: Condemnor and Condemnee Perspectives”, 22nd Annual Eminent Domain Conference (San Diego): The Basics & Beyond (March 5-6, 2020)
    • Speaker, “Most Injurious Use: Ways to Use It, Abuse It, and What the Courts are Saying About It”, 53rd Annual Litigation Seminar, Appraisal Institute, Southern California Chapter (November 5, 2020)

    Qualifications

    Bar Admissions
    • California
    • U.S. District Court Central District of California
    Other Affiliations
    • State Bar of California
    • Orange County Bar Association
    • American Bar Association
    Past Positions
    • Honorable Patricia D. Benke, California Appellate Court Judge, for the Fourth District, Division One, Judicial Extern

    Fees

    • Offers Free Initial Consultation
    • Accepts Credit Cards

    Office Info

    map bg
    Anish J. Banker
    Phone:
    (949) 652-2622
    Website:
    https://www.phl-law.comhttps://phl-law.com/
    Address:
    2 Park Plaza, Suite 550, Irvine, CA 92614
    Get direction

    Other Colleagues

    Nearby Lawyers

    • Business Law
    • Alternative Dispute Resolution
    • Real Estate
    • Environment
    background
    woman

    The power of the lawyer is in the uncertainty of the law.