04/24/2008 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

was not any use of the property by New Horizons, because New Horizons did not use it for anything until Alcohope had left. He pointed out that what The Source is trying to do is to piggyback on Alcohope's use of the property, and it is known that Alcohope, in October 2003 had made the decision, and not just an intention, but had made a legal commitment to leave that property before there were any storms, by signing a lease with the hospital entity, and promising to build a new facility on the hospital campus. Attorney O'Haire argued that there is no ambiguity that Alcohope intended to abandon the property, because they did on April 1, 2005. He suggested that there could be no debate or arguments in that regard because there was no one from Alcohope to counter what Alcohope actually did, and that was, they promised to leave in 2003 and left in 2005. He alluded to references from Attorneys Henderson and Vitunac about a case involving a property owner who had the intent to lease the property, and felt that was not the same as having an intent to sell the property. He argued that when one leases a retail property and intends to continue to lease it, that person intends to use it as retail to successive tenants. But when one intends to sell a property one has no control over what a new owner is going to do and so the intent is not to have a continuing use. He contended that it cannot be, because it is not going to be your use once you sell it. He further argued that an intent to sell is not the same as an intent to lease, because it does not indicate any intention about what use the property would be put to. Therefore the cases do not give any guidance at all. Attorney O'Haire thought the hurricane waiver was a total "red herring," because Alcohope was leaving before there was any storm; and they left after the storm had occurred, as they planned to do before there was any storm on the horizon. Therefore, they are not entitled to any additional time for repairs. He argued that New Horizons use of the property was all through the testimony of Ms. Wakefield, and questioned where were the people she claimed were working on the property after April 1, 2005, and why we have not heard from any of those April 24, 2008 50 Special Call Meeting (The Source)