You Got the Letter. Here’s What Happens Next.
You are sitting at a kitchen table in Redford, or in Pilares, or in a ranch house your family has worked for five generations, and there is a letter on the table from U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It says the government wants to come onto your land to survey. It says that if you do not let them, they can take your property through eminent domain. The letter sounds like a formality. It is not. It is the opening move of a federal condemnation proceeding, and how you respond in the next thirty days will determine whether the government pays you a fair price for your land or steals it from your family at a number their appraiser pulled out of thin air.
Joe Carrasco, a 71-year-old retired oil-field worker in Redford, received one of these letters. His family has been on the banks of the Rio Grande since before he was born. He raises cattle and grows alfalfa. He can see the mountains on the Mexican side of the river from his carport. The government is now telling him that the same river his family has irrigated from for over a century may soon have a border barrier running along it, and that the land the barrier crosses belongs to the United States now — or will, as soon as the lawyers in Washington finish the paperwork. Adan Madrid, 65, a descendant of one of Redford’s founding families, received a letter offering him $2,500 for a right of passage on his farm — or risk losing his entire property, including his home, through eminent domain. Yolanda Alvarado, 38, in nearby Pilares, received the same letter. They are not alone. The federal government has sent these notices to an estimated 400 landowners in the Big Bend region.
We are The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC, and we have been fighting federal agencies in federal court for 27 years. We have recovered more than $50 million for Texas families since 1998. Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, is a federal-court-admitted trial lawyer who worked on the BP Texas City refinery explosion litigation. Our associate, Lupe Peña, is a former insurance-defense attorney — meaning he knows how the other side builds its files — and he is fully fluent in Spanish, because the families facing this fight in Presidio County deserve a lawyer who speaks their language in the courtroom, not just at the front desk. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. This page will tell you exactly what the letter means, what you must do this week, what you must never sign, and how we fight the federal government for the full value of your land.
What the CBP Letter Actually Says — and What It Does Not Say
The letter you received is a preliminary step. It does not mean the government has taken your land yet. It means the government wants to enter your property to conduct surveys, environmental assessments, and engineering studies — the groundwork for a future taking. The letter threatens eminent domain because federal law allows the government to use that threat as leverage to obtain voluntary access.
Here is what the letter does not say, and what the government is counting on you not to know: the letter is not the taking itself. The government cannot actually seize your property until it files a formal condemnation action in federal court, deposits its estimated compensation with the court, and follows the procedures set out in the Declaration of Taking Act (40 U.S.C. § 3114). That is the moment you lose title. Until that filing happens — and it may not happen for months, or at all, depending on how the project unfolds — you still own every acre, and you still have the right to say no to survey access.
The government wants you to believe that resistance is futile. The government wants you to sign the Right of Entry form, let the surveyors walk your property, and quietly accept whatever number they eventually offer. That is the path that ends with the government paying you $2,500 for a right of passage on land worth $250,000 — the exact offer Adan Madrid received. That is the path that ends with the government putting a wall through your alfalfa field and telling you the severance damage to your remaining acreage is zero. That is the path you do not have to walk.
The Right of Entry Trap: Why You Must Not Sign Anything Yet
If there is one piece of advice on this page that matters more than every other, it is this: do not sign the Right of Entry form, do not sign any consent letter, do not sign any document from CBP or any contractor working for the federal government, until a lawyer has read it and explained what it does.
Here is why. The Right of Entry form is designed to look like a simple permission slip — let the surveyors walk your land for a few days, what is the harm? The harm is in the language the government does not highlight. A typical Right of Entry grants the government and its contractors broad access not just to survey but to conduct testing, remove samples, and enter at any time for purposes related to the project. Once signed, that form can be introduced in a later proceeding as evidence that you consented to the project generally — not just to the survey. It can be used to undercut your argument that the taking exceeds what is necessary. It can even be used to limit the severance damages you can claim, because you ‘voluntarily’ granted access to begin with.
Even worse: if you sign a Right of Entry and the government later files a Declaration of Taking, the access you already granted is not undone. The surveyors’ work — the borings, the environmental samples, the engineering studies — remains valid evidence against you. The government uses its own survey to argue for the scope of the taking and the value of the easement, and you handed them that evidence for free.
There is no deadline in the letter that forces you to respond immediately. The government can file a condemnation action if you refuse, but that filing triggers your right to a jury trial on compensation — which is exactly what we want. The ‘pressure’ of the letter is a tactic, not a legal requirement. Call us before you sign anything. The consultation is free, and we will tell you what the form actually says and whether there is a version of it that protects your rights.
The Fifth Amendment and ‘Just Compensation’: What the Constitution Actually Guarantees You
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution says, in language that has not changed since 1791: ‘…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.’ That sentence is the foundation of your case. It means the government can take your land — federal courts almost never block a taking for national security, and the REAL ID Act of 2005 has given the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to waive virtually every environmental and procedural law that might otherwise slow construction. But the government cannot take your land without paying you for it. And ‘just compensation’ is not whatever number the government’s appraiser decides to offer. It is the full measure of what you have lost.
Texas has its own constitutional tradition of protecting private property rights. Article I, Section 17 of the Texas Constitution requires that no person’s property be taken, damaged, or destroyed for public use without adequate compensation. The Texas Legislature strengthened these protections in 2011 with Chapter 2206 of the Texas Government Code, which requires condemning authorities to make a ‘bona fide offer’ based on a written appraisal before initiating condemnation proceedings. Federal proceedings can preempt some of these state procedural requirements, but they do not erase the principle: the government must pay you what your land is actually worth.
What does ‘just compensation’ include? It is not just the fair market value of the acreage the government physically takes. It includes the diminution in value of the land you keep — what lawyers call severance damages. It includes the loss of access to the river if the wall cuts off your irrigation. It includes the loss of views if the wall blocks the mountain panorama that makes your property valuable to a buyer. It includes the cost of cattle crossings, gate installations, and changes to your agricultural operation. It can include business interruption — the loss of income from a river-guide service or a canoe-rental business that depends on unobstructed river access. In some cases, it can include the cost of relocating equipment, water lines, and fencing.
The government will try to define ‘just compensation’ as narrowly as possible. Their appraiser will value your land as ‘raw desert acreage’ and ignore the fact that your family has cultivated it for five generations. Their appraiser will look at comparable sales of unimproved land in the county and ignore the fact that your property has river frontage, senior water rights, and a view of the Chisos Mountains. Our job is to expand the definition until it includes everything the taking actually takes from you.
The ‘Quick Take’: How the Government Can Seize Your Land Before You Ever See a Courtroom
Federal eminent domain law has a feature that most landowners do not know about until it is too late. It is called the ‘quick take’ procedure, and it is authorized by the Declaration of Taking Act, 40 U.S.C. § 3114. Under this statute, the government can file a Declaration of Taking in federal court, deposit its own estimate of ‘just compensation’ with the court, and take title to your property immediately — before any jury has heard a single piece of evidence about what the land is actually worth.
That is the tactical pressure point. The government gets the land. You get a check for whatever amount the government’s appraiser decided was fair. And the burden shifts to you to prove that the number is too low. You are now litigating against the United States Department of Justice with the government already in possession of your property and construction crews potentially ready to break ground.
This is not a hypothetical. It happened to landowners along the border in South Texas in 2007-2008, and it is the playbook the Trump administration is prepared to use in the Big Bend sector. The ‘quick take’ is designed to create exactly the dynamic the government wants: you are under financial pressure, the government has your land, construction is about to begin, and the only way to get full compensation is to spend years in federal court fighting an agency with unlimited resources.
Here is what most people do not know: the ‘quick take’ does not eliminate your right to a jury trial. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 71.1 and the Fifth Amendment, you have the right to demand a jury trial on the issue of just compensation. The government may hold title, but the final number is decided by twelve people from the federal judicial district where your land sits — and in West Texas, those twelve people understand ranching, understand water rights, and understand what the government taking a family’s land actually means. We have tried cases in federal court. We know how to pick a jury in West Texas. We know which jurors respond to the evidence of a family’s loss, and we know how to keep the ones who will not.
Why the Government’s First Offer Is Never Enough
The number in the letter you received — whether it is $2,500 for a right of passage or a larger sum for an easement — is not a negotiation. It is an anchor. The government is trained to start low because experience has taught federal agencies that a significant percentage of landowners will accept the first offer, especially when the alternative is years of litigation against the United States.
The government’s appraisal is almost always based on a narrow set of comparable sales — typically raw, unimproved land in the county — and it almost always ignores the features that make your specific property valuable. The government will not credit your family for the irrigation infrastructure you have built over decades. The government will not credit you for the agricultural productivity your land has demonstrated. The government will not credit you for the view, the river access, or the potential for commercial tourism. Their appraiser will assign a per-acre value that would be appropriate for a parcel with none of those features and apply it to your land as if those features did not exist.
Our job is to challenge every assumption in the government’s appraisal. We commission our own independent appraisal from a Texas-credentialed land appraiser who actually walks your property, reviews your historical use, and understands the Big Bend market. We hire agricultural economists to quantify the value of your crops, your cattle operation, and any business that depends on river access. We bring in expert witnesses on water rights, viewshed economics, and — where appropriate — the commercial tourism potential of a property that sits in the shadow of Big Bend National Park. The difference between the government’s number and ours can be tenfold, and that difference is the fight.
Severance Damages: Protecting the Rest of Your Ranch
When the government takes a strip of your land along the river for a border barrier, it does not just take that strip. It often takes the usefulness of the land behind it. A 150-foot easement for a wall, a patrol road, and a enforcement zone can landlock your remaining acreage, cut off your irrigation, disrupt your drainage, and destroy the view that makes your property marketable. The law calls this ‘severance damage’ — the loss in value to the remainder. The law requires the government to pay you for it.
Severance damages are where most landowners leave money on the table. The government’s appraiser will typically conclude that the remainder is ‘not affected’ by the taking, or that any effect is ‘speculative.’ That conclusion is almost never correct in Big Bend. If the wall blocks access to the river, your remaining land loses its irrigation potential. If the wall disrupts the natural drainage, your remaining land loses its agricultural productivity. If the wall sits between your house and the mountains, your remaining land loses the view that made it worth owning. Each of these is a measurable, compensable loss.
To prove severance damages, we need to understand the physical impact of the proposed barrier on your specific property. That is why we commission hydrological surveys to document how the wall will affect drainage and water flow. That is why we document your current irrigation system — ditches, headgates, wells, pumps — and how the wall disrupts each component. That is why we commission drone and aerial photography of the ‘before’ state: once construction starts, the unobstructed view is gone, and we need a permanent record of what the land looked like before the government took its piece.
Highest and Best Use: What Your Land Is Really Worth
The government’s appraiser will tell the jury that your land is worth $400 an acre because that is what raw desert land sold for in the county last year. That number is wrong, and here is why. The ‘highest and best use’ of a property is the use that a reasonable buyer would make of it, given the property’s characteristics and the market. For a parcel along the Rio Grande in the Big Bend region, that use may not be ‘raw desert acreage.’ It may be:
- Commercial tourism — river-frontage property near Big Bend National Park has value as a location for a lodge, a campground, a river-guide service, or a vacation rental. The National Park draws nearly 500,000 visitors a year, and the demand for river-based recreation consistently outstrips supply.
- Specialized agriculture — irrigated alfalfa, pecans, or other high-value crops can produce income that bears no resemblance to dryland ranching. If your family has cultivated this land for generations, the soil quality, the water rights, and the agricultural infrastructure all add value.
- Conservation easement value — depending on the market, a property with rare habitat, endangered species, or scenic attributes may carry a conservation premium that the government’s appraisal ignores.
- Hunting and recreation leases — in West Texas, hunting leases for deer, javelina, and other game species can generate significant annual income, and that income is part of the property’s value.
Challenging the government’s appraisal on highest-and-best-use grounds is where experienced condemnation counsel earns the fee. We bring in experts who know the Big Bend market — not generic appraisers from Houston or Dallas, but people who have sold river-frontage property in the Bend, who understand the tourism economy, who can quantify the difference between a raw-acre appraisal and the real market value of your land. When we put that testimony in front of a West Texas federal jury, the government’s number starts to look like what it is: a lowball.
The REAL ID Act Waivers: What the Government Waived, and What It Did Not
In 2005, Congress passed the REAL ID Act. Section 102 of that Act gave the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority to waive all legal requirements the Secretary determines necessary to ensure expeditious construction of barriers and roads along the border. That waiver authority is broad. It has been used to bypass the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, and dozens of other federal and state laws that would normally apply to a construction project of this scale.
For landowners in the Big Bend region, the waivers mean that the government can build a wall through habitat for the ocelot, the Mexican spotted owl, and the Big Bend gambusia without the usual environmental review. The waivers mean the government can reroute the Rio Grande’s tributaries, disrupt desert springs, and fragment wildlife corridors without the usual mitigation. The waivers mean that the normal legal challenges to a project of this scope — the environmental impact statement, the public-comment period, the judicial review of agency action — are not available.
But the waivers do not waive the Fifth Amendment. The government can waive environmental laws. It cannot waive the constitutional requirement to pay just compensation. The IIRIRA of 1996, which provides the underlying statutory authority for border barrier construction, expressly preserves the government’s eminent domain power, but it does not exempt the government from the constitutional obligation to pay for what it takes. Your case is not a challenge to the wall. Your case is a fight for the money. The waivers do not touch that fight.
Evidence Preservation: What You Must Do This Week
Every day that passes between the day you received the letter and the day construction begins is a day we can use to build your case. But only if you preserve the evidence. Here is what to do, and in what order.
First, commission an independent appraisal. Do not wait for the government to file its Declaration of Taking. Hire a Texas-credentialed land appraiser — ideally one with Big Bend experience — to walk your property, document its features, and put a value on it under the highest-and-best-use standard. The appraisal should cover the acreage the government proposes to take, the severance damage to the remainder, and any business-interruption losses. The appraisal should be in writing, with photographs and supporting data, and it should be dated before any construction activity begins.
Second, document your historical land use. Gather every deed, every tax record, every agricultural lease, every water-rights document, every family photograph, and every piece of correspondence that shows how this land has been used and what it has produced. The longer the documented history, the stronger your severance-damages claim. If your family has been on this land since the 1870s, that history is part of the value the government must pay for.
Third, commission hydrological and soil surveys. The wall will affect drainage, irrigation, and soil stability. A qualified hydrologist or agricultural engineer can document those effects before construction begins. Once the wall is in place, the ‘before’ condition is gone, and reconstructing it becomes expensive and uncertain.
Fourth, commission drone and aerial photography. A licensed drone operator can produce high-resolution images and video of your property from multiple angles, showing the river, the mountains, the agricultural fields, and the improvements (fencing, irrigation systems, structures) that the wall will affect. These images become exhibits at trial — permanent proof of what the land looked like before the government took its piece.
Fifth, do not sign anything. We will say it again because the government will say it differently: do not sign the Right of Entry form, do not sign any consent letter, do not sign any document from CBP or any contractor, until we have reviewed it. If the government or its contractors pressure you for access, refer them to us. If they show up unannounced, call us. The consultation is free, and a five-minute phone call can prevent a mistake that costs you years of litigation leverage.
The Proof Story: How We Build Your Case From Letter to Verdict
Here is how a federal condemnation case actually gets built, step by step, in the order that wins.
Week one: we respond to the letter. We decline to sign the Right of Entry form without modification. We request the government’s specific authority for the taking, the scope of the proposed easement, and the legal basis for any urgency. We begin preserving evidence: independent appraisal, historical records, hydrology, drone photography.
Month one: we file our appearance and represent you in any preliminary negotiations. We demand that the government identify the specific parcels it intends to take, the basis for its estimate of just compensation, and the environmental and engineering studies it has already performed.
Month two to month six: the government files its Declaration of Taking. It deposits its estimated compensation. We file our answer and demand a jury trial on the issue of just compensation. We conduct discovery into the government’s internal appraisals, its necessity determinations, and the scope of the proposed easement. We depose the government’s appraiser and the project manager.
Month six to month eighteen: expert discovery. We retain our own appraiser, our agricultural economist, our hydrologist, and our viewshed expert. We exchange expert reports. We prepare for trial.
Month eighteen to month thirty: trial. A federal jury in the Western District of Texas hears the evidence. The government puts on its appraiser, who testifies that the land is worth $400 an acre. We put on our team, who testify that the land is worth ten times that — because of the river frontage, the irrigation infrastructure, the agricultural productivity, the view, the commercial tourism potential, and the severance damage to the remainder. The jury returns a verdict. That verdict, not the government’s first offer, is what the government pays.
This is the work we do. We have done it in federal court. We know the judges, we know the local rules, and we know how to put a number in front of a West Texas jury that reflects what your land is actually worth.
Federal Court: Why This Is Where We Fight
Federal condemnation cases are heard in U.S. District Court. The district is determined by where the property sits. For Big Bend and Presidio County, that means the Western District of Texas, with venues in Alpine, Pecos, El Paso, or Midland depending on the docket. The judge decides legal issues — the scope of the taking, the admissibility of evidence, the legal standard for just compensation. The jury decides the number.
West Texas federal juries are not like urban juries. They understand ranching. They understand water rights. They understand what it means when the government takes a family’s land. They have watched their neighbors receive the same letter. They know that a $2,500 offer for a right of passage is not ‘just compensation’ for land that has been in a family since the 1870s. We have tried cases in front of juries like these. We know which jurors respond to evidence of family legacy, which jurors understand the value of agricultural infrastructure, and which jurors will not be moved by the government’s argument that your land is ‘just desert.’
Ralph Manginello is admitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, and he has practiced in federal court for 27 years. Lupe Peña is also federal-court-admitted. The Manginello Law Firm is built to try cases in federal courtrooms, and we bring that experience to every condemnation case we handle.
Mediation and Non-Monetary Concessions: Sometimes the Win Is in the Details
Not every fight ends in a courtroom. Federal condemnation cases are routinely referred to mediation, and mediation can produce outcomes that a jury verdict cannot — non-monetary concessions that preserve the practical value of your property even after the government has taken its strip.
We negotiate for gates in the barrier so that you can move cattle, equipment, and vehicles across the easement without driving miles out of your way. We negotiate for cattle crossings and wildlife crossings that maintain the working integrity of your ranch. We negotiate for the timing of construction — seasonal workarounds that protect your planting and harvest cycles. We negotiate for access easements that preserve your irrigation infrastructure. We negotiate for the relocation of utility lines, water lines, and fencing at the government’s expense. None of these concessions appear on the government’s first offer letter. All of them are achievable with the right representation.
The best condemnation outcomes combine a strong jury-trial posture with a willingness to negotiate for the concessions that matter to your specific operation. We prepare every case as if it will go to trial — because the government’s willingness to settle for full value increases when it knows we are ready to try the case. That is the leverage a federal-court trial firm brings to a mediation table.
Timeline: How Long Does This Take?
Federal condemnation cases typically take 18 months to three years from the date the government files its Declaration of Taking to a final resolution. The ‘quick take’ means the government has title early, but the compensation fight can take years. The timeline depends on the complexity of the case, the court’s docket, and the government’s willingness to negotiate.
For the Big Bend landowners currently receiving letters, the realistic timeline is this: the letter is the beginning. The actual condemnation filing may not come for months, and the resolution of the compensation fight will not come for years. During that time, you continue to own your land, you continue to farm and ranch, and we build the case that will determine the final number.
The Tucker Act (28 U.S.C. § 2501) gives landowners six years to file an inverse condemnation claim in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims if the government takes your property without filing a Declaration of Taking. If you have already received a letter and the government has not yet filed, that clock is running. Do not assume the government will play by the timetable you expect.
Fees: What This Costs and How We Get Paid
Condemnation cases are not handled on a pure contingency basis the way a car-crash case might be. The fee structures vary — some cases proceed on a hybrid contingency, others on an hourly basis with a success fee, others on a flat fee for specific stages. We discuss the fee arrangement in the first call, in plain language, with no surprises. The consultation is free, there is no fee unless we win, and we will explain exactly what that means for your specific case before you sign anything.
Who We Are: The Lawyers Who Will Stand Between You and the Federal Government
Ralph Manginello founded The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC in 2001, after being admitted to the State Bar of Texas in 1998. He is a federal-court-admitted trial lawyer with 27 years of courtroom experience, and he was part of the legal team that fought the BP Texas City refinery explosion litigation. Ralph is a former journalist and a championship-level point guard — he explains complex cases like a storyteller and fights them like a competitor. He has recovered more than $50 million for Texas families since 1998. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
Lupe Peña is a third-generation Texan with family ties to the King Ranch. He was born and raised in Sugar Land, where he lives with his family today. Before joining the firm, Lupe spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm, in the rooms where insurance companies and federal agencies decide how to value claims and how to fight the people making them. He knows how the other side builds its files because he built them himself. Lupe earned his B.B.A. in International Business from St. Mary’s University in San Antonio and his J.D. from South Texas College of Law Houston. He is fluent in Spanish, and he serves Texas families fully in Spanish — in the courtroom, in depositions, and in client meetings.
You can read more about Ralph and Lupe, and reach our contact page, through the links on this site. The consultation is free, confidential, and available 24 hours a day. Hablamos Español.
Frequently Asked Questions
What should I do first if I received a CBP letter?
Do not sign the Right of Entry form or any other document from CBP or its contractors. Call us before you respond. The consultation is free, and we will explain what the letter actually means and what your options are. The government wants you to believe that signing is the only path forward. It is not.
Can the federal government really take my land?
Yes. Federal eminent domain power is broad, and the REAL ID Act of 2005 gave the Secretary of Homeland Security authority to waive most of the laws that would normally slow a project like this. Federal courts almost never block a taking for national security. But the government cannot take your land without paying just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. Your fight is over the money, not the wall.
What is ‘just compensation’?
Just compensation is the full measure of what you have lost. It includes the fair market value of the acreage the government takes, the diminution in value of the land you keep (severance damages), business-interruption losses, and the cost of changes to your operation. It is not whatever the government’s appraiser decides to offer.
What is the ‘quick take’?
The ‘quick take’ is a procedure under the Declaration of Taking Act (40 U.S.C. § 3114) that allows the government to file a condemnation action, deposit its own estimated compensation, and take title to your property immediately — before a jury has decided what the land is actually worth. It shifts the burden to you to prove the government’s number is too low.
How long do I have to respond to the letter?
There is no legal deadline in the letter itself. The government can file a condemnation action if you refuse access, but that filing triggers your right to a jury trial. The ‘urgency’ in the letter is a tactic, not a legal requirement. Take the time to get legal advice before you sign anything.
What are severance damages?
Severance damages are the loss in value to the land you keep when the government takes a portion of your property. If the wall blocks access to the river, disrupts your irrigation, or destroys your view, the remaining acreage is worth less — and the government must pay you for that loss.
Can I get a jury trial?
Yes. Under the Fifth Amendment and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 71.1, you have the right to demand a jury trial on the issue of just compensation. The government may hold title, but the final number is decided by twelve people from your federal judicial district. In West Texas, those jurors understand ranching and water rights.
What if the government offers me $2,500 for a right of passage?
That is a lowball offer designed to be accepted before the landowner understands the value of what is being taken. Adan Madrid received exactly that offer for his farm near the riverbank. The first offer is never the last offer, and it is almost never the right number. Commission an independent appraisal, document your historical use, and call us before you respond.
What is the statute of limitations for challenging the taking?
For a Declaration of Taking filed in federal court, the right to challenge the compensation amount is part of the same proceeding — you assert it in your answer. For an inverse condemnation claim (where the government takes without filing), the Tucker Act gives you six years from the date of taking to file in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (28 U.S.C. § 2501). If you have received a letter and the government has not yet filed, that clock may be running.
Do you handle cases in West Texas?
Yes. Our office is based in Houston, with additional offices in Austin and Beaumont, and we handle federal condemnation cases throughout Texas, including the Western District of Texas. Ralph Manginello and Lupe Peña are both federal-court-admitted. The consultation is free, and we will travel to meet you in Big Bend.
What does it cost?
The consultation is free, and there is no fee unless we win. For condemnation cases, the specific fee arrangement depends on the structure of your case — we discuss it in the first call, in plain language. We will explain exactly what the arrangement means for your situation before you sign anything.
Can I afford a lawyer for this?
You cannot afford not to have one. The government’s first offer to Adan Madrid was $2,500 for a right of passage on land that may be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars — and the loss of his entire property was on the table if he refused. The difference between accepting the government’s number and fighting for the real value can be the difference between keeping your ranch and losing it. Call us. The first conversation costs you nothing.
Call Us Before You Sign Anything
If you received a letter from CBP, if you are weighing whether to sign a Right of Entry form, if you want to know what the government is actually offering and what your land is actually worth — call us. The consultation is free, confidential, and available 24 hours a day. We will explain your rights, review any documents you have received, and tell you exactly what the next step is. There is no fee unless we win.
Our managing partner, Ralph Manginello, has 27 years of trial experience in federal court. Our associate, Lupe Peña, is a former insurance-defense attorney who knows how the other side builds its files, and he serves Texas families fully in Spanish. We have recovered more than $50 million for Texas families since 1998. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
Call 1-888-ATTY-911. Hablamos Español. The letter on your kitchen table is not the end of your rights — it is the beginning of the fight. We are ready when you are.
You can learn more about our background and practice on the Attorney911 homepage, read about Ralph Manginello’s federal court experience, and learn about Lupe Peña’s background. If you have questions about the condemnation process, our practice areas page covers the full scope of our work. For additional educational resources, visit our YouTube channel or contact us directly.