Tuesday 17 March 2009

Harcourt Briefing - March 2009

Just when Harcourt seem to be getting the "green light" as far as the Hopkins Masterplan goes, as the planning report says there are no planning issues with the development going ahead and it therefore is dependent on Harcourt's financial probity (and the assumption that the States can afford 1/2 million in maintenance on the sunken road), the case in Las Vegas rears its head again. Here is the story, dated March 16 2009.

http://www.globest.com/news/1368_1368/lasvegas/177477-1.html

Sullivan Square Lawsuit Ramping Up Again
By Brian K. Miller

LAS VEGAS-Locally based Glen, Smith & Glen Development and Dublin, Ireland-based Harcourt Development are back in court this week over Sullivan Square, a would-have-been 1,300-unit luxury residential-over-retail project at Durango Drive and Interstate 215 valued at approximately $1 billion. Eighth Judicial District Court Judge Mark Denton will hear two motions to dismiss GSG's complaint, which was substantially amended in December after Denton threw out most of the original complaints in August on a technicality.

Generally speaking, GSG and Harcourt created a development partnership whereby GSG would manage the development and Harcourt would be responsible for providing all the equity needed to finance construction. The lawsuit was filed in April 2008 after Harcourt decided not to provide the necessary equity.

The amended complaint revives key claims such as breach of contract and breach of fiduciary responsibility, and adds new ones including fraud and negligent misrepresentation, according to court documents reviewed by GlobeSt.com. In Monday's hearing, Judge Denton was scheduled to hear to the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction on behalf of the Irish defendants and a more general motion to dismiss the first amended complaint.

"We're very confident that eventually this case will get to a jury," John Manly, the plaintiff's attorney, told GlobeSt.com in December, the week before the judge allowed the amended complaint.
 

No comments: