|
Post by wvhsparent on Mar 17, 2008 20:07:04 GMT -5
Sleepless...also be assured that the motions filed in the case overwhelmingly went the way of the SD and not BB. This IMHO will be another of those. Judge Kilander is pretty reasonable. It would have been nice if he had the power to reduce the jury award, but I don't think he did.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 20:31:47 GMT -5
Sleepless...also be assured that the motions filed in the case overwhelmingly went the way of the SD and not BB. This IMHO will be another of those. Judge Kilander is pretty reasonable. It would have been nice if he had the power to reduce the jury award, but I don't think he did. Thanks parent. That makes me feel better. I am glad he will be deciding things and not a bunch of jurors. Can he hear the NSFOC case too? Gosh, we are going to be in court alot.
|
|
|
Post by gandalf on Mar 17, 2008 21:06:31 GMT -5
Thanks gatordog. I knew you would come through with the numbers and the analysis! So to me it seems if we close now, the SB is gambling that our costs to walk away would be less than $9 mil. I hope we get a reasonable judge and not someone that is drinking the same crazy drink as the jury was in the last trial. Does anyone remember what BB was supposedly down to in negotiations? Was it $400K+/acre? Don't know the negotiated price, but we have the locked in jury $$ of $500+ per acre to blow away their argument of the district paying damages on "loss of value". the jury award is ( or was supposed to be) as of 2 years ago, not current so it has no relevance does it ?
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 21:10:11 GMT -5
Don't know the negotiated price, but we have the locked in jury $$ of $500+ per acre to blow away their argument of the district paying damages on "loss of value". the jury award is ( or was supposed to be) as of 2 years ago, not current so it has no relevance does it ? Don't we also have a contract from PREIT for $560K an acre?
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Mar 17, 2008 21:31:27 GMT -5
Didn't BB just recently lose a motion for the damage to the remainder?
I also thought that the only thing BB could get if the district walked away were legal fees. That was stressed quite a bit in the early days of the law suit. If the district didn't like the price, we were only obligated to pay BBs legal fees.
|
|
|
Post by gandalf on Mar 17, 2008 21:41:45 GMT -5
the jury award is ( or was supposed to be) as of 2 years ago, not current so it has no relevance does it ? Don't we also have a contract from PREIT for $560K an acre? I believe from things I have read over the past year that 59th street frontage worth more to retail than the land behind it, which seems to make sense. Not being a real estate guru, someone can correct me if I am wrong here. and I stress this is unconfirmed, but I keep hearing that the Preitt deal is in trouble. Now if they are reconsidering because 3000 kids - wallets in hand, won't be there to shop at the lifestyle mall as they assumed when they signed, I could see where that would upset BB.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Mar 17, 2008 21:43:34 GMT -5
Don't we also have a contract from PREIT for $560K an acre? I believe from things I have read over the past year that 59th street frontage worth more to retail than the land behind it, which seems to make sense. and I stress this is unconfirmed, but I keep hearing that the Preitt deal is in trouble. Now if they are reconsidering because 3000 kids - wallets in hand, won't be there to shop at the lifestyle mall as they assumed when they signed, I could see where that would upset BB. That would be BBs fault for outsmarting themselves. They sold to PREITT with the suggestion that a high school would be there, fought the district tooth and nail for a very high price and then the district said, no can't afford it. And even after the jury came back, the district offered to buy 40 acres at the jury's price. BB said no.
|
|
|
Post by gandalf on Mar 17, 2008 21:53:14 GMT -5
I believe from things I have read over the past year that 59th street frontage worth more to retail than the land behind it, which seems to make sense. and I stress this is unconfirmed, but I keep hearing that the Preitt deal is in trouble. Now if they are reconsidering because 3000 kids - wallets in hand, won't be there to shop at the lifestyle mall as they assumed when they signed, I could see where that would upset BB. That would be BBs fault for outsmarting themselves. They sold to PREITT with the suggestion that a high school would be there, fought the district tooth and nail for a very high price and then the district said, no can't afford it. And even after the jury came back, the district offered to buy 40 acres at the jury's price. BB said no. just to be clear - I am not supporting BB attorneys, just trying to foresee where they may come from, since they seem to be slightly better at this than we are. As proven by the jury verdict, one does not have to be right to prevail.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Mar 17, 2008 21:56:01 GMT -5
just to be clear - I am not supporting BB attorneys, just trying to foresee where they may come from, since they seem to be slightly better at this than we are. As proven by the jury verdict, one does not have to be right to prevail. I understand completely. But to be quite honest, doesn't matter where they are coming from. Anger doesn't win lawsuits. You have to have some form of legal basis. My understanding of the eminent domain is they don't. They get legal fees if the district walks away.
|
|
|
Post by sleeplessinnpvl on Mar 17, 2008 22:31:23 GMT -5
I believe from things I have read over the past year that 59th street frontage worth more to retail than the land behind it, which seems to make sense. and I stress this is unconfirmed, but I keep hearing that the Preitt deal is in trouble. Now if they are reconsidering because 3000 kids - wallets in hand, won't be there to shop at the lifestyle mall as they assumed when they signed, I could see where that would upset BB. That would be BBs fault for outsmarting themselves. They sold to PREITT with the suggestion that a high school would be there, fought the district tooth and nail for a very high price and then the district said, no can't afford it. And even after the jury came back, the district offered to buy 40 acres at the jury's price. BB said no. Hey, can PREIT sue BB? Another job for Shawn Collins. After all, a promise was made that the school would be built there and they probably had to make that promise in order to get the contract and now the school won't be built there like BB promised......etc. etc. Sound familiar?
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Mar 18, 2008 8:12:28 GMT -5
Don't we also have a contract from PREIT for $560K an acre? I believe from things I have read over the past year that 59th street frontage worth more to retail than the land behind it, which seems to make sense. Not being a real estate guru, someone can correct me if I am wrong here. and I stress this is unconfirmed, but I keep hearing that the Preitt deal is in trouble. Now if they are reconsidering because 3000 kids - wallets in hand, won't be there to shop at the lifestyle mall as they assumed when they signed, I could see where that would upset BB. One would think then that if the PRIET deal hinged on the school BB would would have been more agreeable to work with the SD.
|
|