Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Star-Telegram: Cowboys sue stadium suiteholders for not fulfilling lease terms

tr1

By tr1
in Around the NFL

Recommended Posts

tr1

tr1

Posted
Posted

By SANDRA BAKER

http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/03/23/2062358/cowboys-sue-stadium-suiteholders.html

The Dallas Cowboys are going to court to recover tens of millions of dollars from individuals and companies who have stopped making lease payments on their luxury suites at the team's new $1.2 billion football stadium in Arlington.

In recent months, attorneys for Cowboys Stadium L.P., an entity controlled by Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, have filed 17 lawsuits in Tarrant County. The largest one is against the Dallas Center for Cosmetic Dentistry, which signed 20-year leases for six suites with an annual fee of $2.1 million, the suit says.

The stadium partnership is suing for $42 million, what the dental group would have paid over the course of the leases. The group paid only $210,000, the suit says. Its principal, Dr. James Addison, did not return a phone call seeking comment.

One case was dismissed last week because an agreement was reached, according to court documents.

The Cowboys are suing for full payment of the 20-year leases, which totals $113.8 million under current terms. The team collected $711,500 in down payments from those leaseholders, but they should have paid $3.2 million by now.

The lawsuits affect only a fraction of the 300 suites that were leased, said Levi McCathern, the attorney representing the stadium partnership. The owners, he said, are not going to let people out of their leases.

Some of those being sued used their suites during the Cowboys' first season in the stadium.

Before the suits were filed, McCathern said, the team made several attempts to accommodate the leaseholders, such as offers to downgrade to a less expensive suite.

The Cowboys, he said, "see the lawsuits as a last resort. We're not chasing mom and pops. Signing up for multimillion-dollar luxury suites is big business; they knew what they're doing."

Most of the leaseholders had attorneys review the leases before they signed, McCathern said.

Attorneys in two cases said they will fight the lawsuits.

Bill Garrison, who represents Architel Holdings and Alexander Muse in one lease, said he will countersue, alleging that the Cowboys staff "engaged in some sales practices" that would not allow his client to fulfill the lease requirements. Muse is a Dallas technology entrepreneur who founded Architel Holdings, an IT outsourcing company.

Cowboys Stadium wants more than $4.8 million for the suite Muse leased. His Architel Holdings paid $24,000 of the $240,000 first-year lease fee but has not paid any more, the suit says.

Attorney Mitch Little said his client, Jason Halek, owner of Halek Energy in Southlake, is being sued, but he did not sign a lease.

Lawsuits were also filed against Just Da Boyz, an online suite entertainment firm operated by Monica Hill in The Colony; Larry Davis of Lake Worth; King-Fischer Ltd. of Grapevine; Sports Nutz of Texas and Copper Oaks Properties, both in Grand Prairie; Reel Entertainment Group in Dallas; Rank Entertainment in Mansfield; Express Services Inc. in Oklahoma; Harold Bird in Dallas; Tarrant County Cowboys and Perry Williams in Amarillo; BWC Properties in Frisco; CRBE, Inc. in Waxahachie; and, Sports Shares Dallas, a Colorado company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stoney26

stoney26

Posted
Posted
It is. Because once the season starts we know who will be in 1st place again :pfft:

:saber:

even if the pukes win the division we all know what will happen in the playoffs...:ols:

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yh1DyvTuDA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yh1DyvTuDA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

OHHH and its fumbled!!! :rotflmao:

and ill throw this one in for the lulz...

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nPrxoShOU8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nPrxoShOU8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

FAIL

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paloosa

paloosa

Posted
Posted
Well, with Snyder he was suing individual seat holders, not corporations that leased a luxury suite. There's a big difference there.

There is no difference whether you are suing an individual or a corporation for non payment. It is just business and when you agree to something you need be held accountable to that unless there are circumstances that prevent you from fulfilling that obligation like loss of a job, your company went bankrupt, or something that makes you have extreme hardship. Dan Snyder did that and he is the bad guy but when Jerry Jones does it then it is ok. Jerry is a snake oil con artist and does the same things his "father" Al davis does. The only difference is that Jerry is only half senial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paulie Walnuts

Paulie Walnuts

Posted
Posted

A few things here.......

When the redskins did this, like in the little old ladys case, they had already sold her season tickets and recouped thier money, AND STILL went after her. Disgusting.

The cowboys are going after corporations, which owe them MUCH more money than a few thousand bucks from a single person. Jerry and company are going after MILLIONS. If you know anything about business, not getting paid for millions that are owed to you is a big deal.

And like it or not, this is a contractual agreement these corporations signed. They owe the money. Simple as that. Companies have assets that can be taken. It is an open and shut case in the eyes of the courts.

But by all means, keep bashing Jerry, and ignoring facts, because its Jerry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Califan007 The Constipated

Califan007 The Constipated

Posted
Posted
A few things here.......

When the redskins did this, like in the little old ladys case, they had already sold her season tickets and recouped thier money, AND STILL went after her. Disgusting.

You'll have to point out where it was reported that her "tickets" were resold...and just for the record, these were premium club seats and suites that would need to be re-sold...not a very easy thing to do as far as re-selling the contracts. Maybe "re-sell" the seats to some individual games here and there, but the entire contract length and price for premium club seats and suites takes far more work.

If you buy a car and enter a contract with a finance company to pay them $20,000 for the car, and you can't keep up the payments, the car gets repossessed. The dealership can re-sell the car, even for more than what you still owed...yet you are STILL responsible legally for paying a certain amount of what you still owe (if not all of it). That's how businesses and business law works.

The cowboys are going after corporations, which owe them MUCH more money than a few thousand bucks from a single person. Jerry and company are going after MILLIONS. If you know anything about business, not getting paid for millions that are owed to you is a big deal.

1) These people the Skins sued were owing as much as $100,000 and more...so it was not "a few thousand bucks". Quite a few of them were business owners who wrote off the club level contract purchases as a business entertainment expense. Yes, the media loved to use the grandmother as the poster child for their articles and, yes, more than a few people lapped it up as if the Skins ONLY went after poor, 73 year old ladies who like quilting Redskins blankets for her grandchildren. Doesn't make it true, though.

2) Can you please tell us the exact amount in which a company or corporation is allowed to sue someone for reneging on their contract without having the "Greedy *******" label attached to them? Thanks.

And like it or not, this is a contractual agreement these corporations signed. They owe the money. Simple as that. Companies have assets that can be taken. It is an open and shut case in the eyes of the courts.

Can I rewrite your paragraph here?

"And like it or not, this is a contractual agreement these individuals signed. They owe the money. Simple as that. People have assets that can be taken. It is an open and shut case in the eyes of the courts."

But by all means, keep bashing Jerry, and ignoring facts, because its Jerry.

"But by all means, keep bashing Snyder, and ignoring facts, because it's Snyder."

Yeah, that works, too :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...