Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-3013 equityWYATT INVESTORS, INC. and ARNOLD FORBES, Plaintiffs VS. J. RAYMOND MILLER, FRANK C. MYERS, III, and J. R. PROPERTIES, INC., Defendants. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 98-3013 EQUITY CIVIL ACTION - EQUITY IN RE' NON JURY TRIAL_ BEFORE HESS, J. DECREE NISI AND NOW, this day of June, 2000, following hearing and careful consideration of the testimony adduced, on the claim of the plaintiffs against the defendants, seeking injunctive relief and damages, judgment is entered in favor of the defendants. On the counterclaim of the defendants against the plaintiffs, we find in favor of the plaintiffs. Unless exceptions hereto are filed within ten (10) days hereof, this decree nisi shall become a final order of court. BY THE COURT, Albert J. Hajjar, Esquire For the Plaintiffs ess, J. L. C. Heim, Esquire For the Defendants WYATT INVESTORS, INC. and ARNOLD FORBES, Plaintiffs VS. J. RAYMOND MILLER, FRANK C. MYERS, III, and J. R. PROPERTIES, INC., Defendants IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 98-3013 EQUITY CIVIL ACTION- EQUITY IN RE: NON JURY TRIAL BEFORE HESS, J. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND DECREE NISI This equity matter has been heard by a judge sitting alone. Despite the length of the proceedings in this case, the matter can be rather easily distilled. The plaintiffs seek damages against the defendants arising out of real estate development projects which, according to the plaintiffs, the defendants failed to bring to completion. The two projects involved are the "Dillsburg Project" and "Route 34 Project" respectively. With respect to the Dillsburg Project, the plaintiff, Wyatt Investors, Inc. (an entity which, despite its name, has not been registered as a corporation and is arguably not entitled to any relief whatsoever), entered into an agreement for the purchase of the Dillsburg property in March of 1996. Wyatt then entered into an oral agreement with defendant, J. Raymond Miller, to develop the property. Wyatt subsequently entered into an agreement to sell the Dillsburg Project to one Gary Wesner. In December of 1996, Wyatt assigned its interest in both contracts to defendant, J. R. Properties, Inc., in consideration for which Wyatt was to receive twenty-five percent of net profits. There were no profits, however, and, eventually, with the agreement of the plaintiffs, the Dillsburg Project was conveyed to Gary Wesner with Wyatt completing the improvements. In 98-3013 EQUITY the end, there was nothing done on the Dillsburg Project which was without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiffs. We are at a loss, therefore, to discern how the defendants are in any way liable for any damages. With regard to the second project, Wyatt entered into an agreement of sale to purchase the Route 34 Project from an estate in March of 1996. In September of 1997, Wyatt assigned its interest in that contract to J. R. Properties, Inc. The plan of the parties was to build a mini storage facility on the property. Eventually, Wyatt and J. R. Properties entered into a contract whereby Wyatt was to construct the storage units. By virtue of the construction contract, Wyatt was to have been paid $950,000, though the contract waived the right to any other profit. The construction agreement was contingent upon the purchase of the real estate by J. R. Properties, Inc. Because the project has never gone forward, Wyatt seeks damages arising out of an alleged breach of the construction agreement and has sought an injunction against defendants, J. Raymond Miller and Frank C. Myers, III, preventing them from selling the subject real estate. It is clear that a critical precondition of the construction agreement was never met. The subject real estate was never, in fact, purchased by J. R. Properties, Inc. and it is not bound to pay for construction on land which it does not own. Instead, the property was conveyed to J. Raymond Miller and Frank C. Myers, III as individuals. They are now, clearly, entitled to dispose of the property as they see fit. The defendants, Miller and J. R. Properties, Inc., filed counterclaims. In part, no doubt, because of Mr. Miller's medical condition, testimony was not forthcoming to support these claims. 98-3013 EQUITY DECREE NISI AND NOW, this day of June, 2000, following hearing and careful consideration of the testimony adduced, on the claim of the plaintiffs against the defendants, seeking injunctive relief and damages, judgment is entered in favor of the defendants. On the counterclaim of the defendants against the plaintiffs, we find in favor of the plaintiffs. Unless exceptions hereto are filed within ten (10) days hereof, this decree nisi shall become a final order of court. Albert J. Hajjar, Esquire For the Plaintiffs BY THE COURT, K ~s, J. L. C. Heim, Esquire For the Defendams :rlm