Judge rules against Wilkins re: injunction

[Gold]

I'm not surprised.  http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8991868

[Conan71]

Non-binding agreement.  Doesn't that give you about the same legs oral contract in court (or even less so)?

I hate to see what happened to Will, but believe the judge was correct in his ruling.

[Gold]

Depends what the oral agreement is for and what's at stake.  I can think of some scenarios where it might work, but they mostly involve agreements between lawyers where the court is ordering you to come to some sort of agreement.

But for this kind of thing, yeah, you're right.  It's worth the paper it was printed on.  

This whole thing got blown way out of proportion.  People need to not be so paranoid in this town.

[Wrinkle]

The Mayor paid BOK $7.1 million on less.

[RecycleMichael]

You just can't stay on topic without bashing the Mayor, wrinkle...

This was about a real estate transaction with no documentation.

The judge was wise.

[Renaissance]

He may have a claim for reliance damages on the cancellation of the contract for exclusive negotiations.  It completely depends on what the instrument for exclusive negotiation looks like.  These things tend to have escape clauses for ending the negotiating period early.  Sometimes they'll have releases too.  

The more interesting question will be whether TDA breached its contract to negotiate, and if so, whether Wilkins is entitled to damages for the breach.  

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

You just can't stay on topic without bashing the Mayor, wrinkle...

This was about a real estate transaction with no documentation.

The judge was wise.

As I recall, the Mayor injected a "Moral Obligation" heretofore unregistered anywhere.

The similarities are uncanny, and not a change of topic. Did I mention a stupid political move on her part?

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
The similarities are uncanny...

They both involved city government and money. Yes, I see the circle of life now.

You are trying to link a failed airline and a guy trying to build some townhouses.

Why stop there?

The court ruling saying the guy had nothing in writing and no case...it is amazingly just like when the Beatles broke up over Yoko Ono.

[Curmudgeon]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
The similarities are uncanny...

They both involved city government and money. Yes, I see the circle of life now.

You are trying to link a failed airline and a guy trying to build some townhouses.

Why stop there?

The court ruling saying the guy had nothing in writing and no case...it is amazingly just like when the Beatles broke up over Yoko Ono.

+1 for the Beatles reference

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
The similarities are uncanny...

They both involved city government and money. Yes, I see the circle of life now.

You are trying to link a failed airline and a guy trying to build some townhouses.

Why stop there?

The court ruling saying the guy had nothing in writing and no case...it is amazingly just like when the Beatles broke up over Yoko Ono.

It was a LAND deal, one declared illegal by the Feds, thus our Mayor offered up our skins instead.

I'm not linking his deal and hers, just the premise, you know word of honor, moral obligation, verbal contract. Getting the harmony yet?  Naw, what am I thinking, it might help if you change your crowd.


PS: That's money directly out of my pocket, and yours.