possess a valid property interest. In Travis Central Appraisal District v. Signature Flight Support Corp., the Court of Appeals of Texas recognized that the ownership interest at issue in that case was “an ownership interest in a leasehold. Because the City [of Austin] own[ed] the improvements but lease[ed] them to appellees, it is perfectly correct to refer to appellees’ ownership interests in the leased facilities and allow them the right to ‘sell’ that leasehold interest.” 140 S.W.3d 833, 841 (Tex.App.2004); see also Panola County Appraisal Dist. v. Panola County Fresh Water Supply Dist. No. 1, 69 S.W.3d 278, 283 (Tex.App.2002) (“A leasehold interest is an ownership right in land that belongs to the lessee.”), 284 (“An ownership interest in a leasehold is n. 16, 97 S.Ct. 1505 (<HOLDING>); Sun Oil Co., 572 F.2d at 818 (stating that “a
recognizing that eontract rights are a form of property and as such may be taken for a public purpose provided that just compensation is paid holding that  7403 requires compensation for every property interest that is taken in the process holding that the trial court was allowed to consider for the purpose of determining just compensation in a condemnation action expert testimony regarding whether the owner of the condemned property would have received permits to develop wetlands existing on the property holding that combating blight is a permissible public purpose and upholding the taking of property for that purpose even when the specific property taken is not in a blighted condition recognizing that civil rights lawsuits are private only in form