The landlords of a Honda dealership engaged in “unfair industrial extortion,” fraudulently misrepresented the possession of the residence and wrongfully delayed design of the retailer for additional than two several years, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court docket has ruled.
The sharply worded determination upheld an award of $10,517,250, in addition legal professional costs, in favor of what was then Majestic Honda, which sought to relocate from Rhode Island to Massachusetts. It is now Balise Honda of North Attleboro.
In 2016, Majestic signed a 23-year lease for the web-site from a group of firms related with Alfredo Dos Anjos. Under the lease, Majestic was to demolish existing structures and develop two new types. The web site is near a CarMax retailer owned by Dos Anjos on the city’s “Automobile Highway,” the choice stated.
What happened was “a bitter and protracted dispute” in which supplier principal James Balise was coerced to market to Dos Anjos for only $1 an adjacent parcel he’d purchased for $800,000, Chief Justice Scott Kafker wrote in the unanimous opinion. He stated Dos Anjos also gave “pretextual causes” for terminating the lease and “willfully and wrongly strung Majestic together as a means to extract undeserved positive aspects.”
The Jan. 24 selection in depth a series of techniques the Dos Anjos companies took to impede Majestic from having necessary municipal permits for the project to check out restricting use of the web-site exclusively to a Honda retailer, therefore stopping Majestic from housing other brands there to terminate the lease and to not reinstate it. The courtroom also mentioned the businesses intentionally manufactured wrong statements and “did nothing at all to accurate their misrepresentations as to the ownership of the premises.”
The lease was reinstated soon after Majestic won at trial, and building proceeded while the Supreme Court charm was pending.
The retail store opened past Could.
“Our motivation has always been to serve the North Attleboro neighborhood and our customers,” Balise explained to Automotive Information.
In the choice, the court docket reported, “The defendants’ carry out — which provided fraudulent misrepresentations and pretextual contractual objections developed to string alongside [Majestic] and coerce added concession to which the defendants were not entitled below the lease — satisfies the common for unfair or deceptive procedures.”
It upheld the demo court’s acquiring that the misconduct delayed the growth and operation of the shop by far more than two yrs and reported proof of unfair and deceptive perform was enough to justify the court’s doubling of the compensatory damages.
Protection lawyer Robert Cordy explained, “The in depth point findings made by the demo judge produced the appeal of his rulings very hard.”
Cordy, of Boston, claimed the case now is staying mediated toward a final settlement.