Gordon + Holmes recently represented a client in an arbitration involving a dispute over ownership and management of a high-rise office building located in a major metropolitan area. The property was jointly owned by a number of investors.

The arbitration was originally filed by our client for the sole purpose of confirming that it had properly and adequately exercised an option to buy out three property owners who sought to block the sale of the property contrary to the governing agreements.

The arbitrator ordered that the case would be tried in two phases. The first phase addressed the enforceability of the purchase option provision. If the arbitrator determined that the option had been properly and adequately exercised, a phase two hearing would determine the value which must be paid to purchase each of the three dissenting property owners’ interests.

Gordon + Holmes presented evidence clearly showing that the option was fully and properly exercised by our client as to all three dissenting owners. We were also able to show that the exercise of the purchase option was approved of by a vast majority of the other owners – even more than required under the agreement.

The arbitrator ordered the three dissenting owners to transfer their interest in the property and set phase two for the valuation of their fractional ownership interests and damages. Additionally, the phase one ruling eliminated a $16 million damage claim against our clients. The property is currently in escrow awaiting consummation of the sale.