10/11/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and $10,000 down payment to Nancy Moon and her attorney, Sam Block, but the contract and down payment were returned both times. Attorney O'Haire stated that he has notified Attorney Block by letter. Chairman Scurlock stated that he had been told by that group that they had given the option of first right of refusal to Ross Laundry, but no offer was made. However, now we are hearing that is not true. Attorney Vitunac explained that the County has a title policy insuring fee simple title to the property, and there is a provision in the lease which the -Smiths had with Nancy Moon that gave the right of first refusal, but the County got a contract over that and a title policy that insures against that. The closing has occurred. If there is a lawsuit on that issue, it is between Nancy Moon and the Smiths, and it would be for financial damages and would not affect the County's title to the property. He understood that Attorney Block did give Ross Laundry the right of first refusal, but it was only for a short time. Attorney O'Haire did not concur that the issue was financial damages. He felt the issue is whether they are entitled to have fee simple ownership of the property pursuant to their right of first refusal. They tendered their down payment in the amount of $10,000 and a fully executed contract twice, and it was returned each time. It is their position that since they were only given a one -day opportunity to exercise their right of first refusal, a court would uphold their right to purchase the property, and they are prepared to take that action if necessary. However, they are hopeful that we could come to agreement on this and that is why they have been negotiating with Attorney Vitunac and Mr. Baird on this matter and have submitted financial statements for this particular laundry. Mr. Ross spoke from the audience and pointed out that if they did receive title to the property, the County would not only OCT 11 995 73 BOOK 74 PAGE 518