sufficiently available and likely in the future as to be a material consideration in deciding how much to pay for the land. See Whitehouse Hotel Ltd. P’ship v. CIR, 615 F.3d 321, 335 (5th Cir.2010) (“The key inquiry [in determining highest and best use] is what a hypothetical willing buyer would consider in deciding how much to pay for the property.” (citing 320.0 Acres, 605 F.2d at 781)); Olson, 292 U.S. at 255, 54 S.Ct. 704 (“The highest.and most profitable use for which the property is adaptable and needed or likely to be needed in the reasonably near future is to be considered ... to the full extent that the prospect of demand for such use affects the market value while the property is privately held.”); Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. United States, 132 F.2d 959, 964 (5th Cir.1943) (<HOLDING>). And on that score, even the Government’s
recognizing that although the case involved an undeveloped property in a state of nature speculative elements regarding potential future uses are  proper to consider if they do in fact influence the value at the time enquired about holding determination of property value in case to decide if assessed value was excessive is not a liquidated demand where only evidence of property value was the conclusory allegation of value in plaintiffs unsworn petition holding in conflict of laws analysis that it was proper to apply the law of the state of washington as to the measure of damages which involved the substantive rights of the parties holding that the nature of the taxpayers legal interest in the subject property is determined by reference to state law holding that the measure of damages of converted property is the market value at the time of conversion