168TH And Dodge, L.P. v. Rave Reviews Cinemas, Ll

501 F.3d 945 (8th Cir. 2007)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P submitted a request for a shopping center called Village Pointe. The Board recommended conditional approval of the plat. D contacted P about a proposal to build a theater at Village Pointe. P and D exchanged plans and discussed the proposal to build. On June 25, 2002, at D's request, P sent D a site plan and proposal for Village Pointe, which included a movie theater complex. In September 2002, P revised and submitted to the Board, the plat that included a movie theater complex. On September 18 P bought an additional 14.67 acres of land to incorporate the movie theater. P had a 90-day due diligence period to 'inspect and review the Due Diligence items ' and P was to 'obtain written evidence that the City had adopted a comprehensive zoning ordinance allowing the use of the Real Estate for retail purposes. On October 3 at D's request, P faxed D the June 25, 2002 letter of intent. D expressed belief that D was 'in agreement on most of all of the major issues' set forth in the June 25, 2002 term sheet. D then stated by letter, 'I look forward to moving on to the completion of the lease documentation, which we can then take to our Board for final discussion and approvals--which, as you know from Jefferson Pointe, is our final step in the approval process.' On November 26, 2002, the parties executed the letter of intent. D also sent P a second letter as well. On December 4, the Board recommended approval of the movie theater complex. On December 30, P advised D of the approved plat and stated that P was going to incur additional significant expenses to accommodate a theater. This included the purchase of the additional property and $594,616 for removal of a gas line. D told P the project was a 'done deal.' By mid-January 2003, the deal was still not done. P needed a signed lease for its financing. Negotiations continued in February and March 2003. P began talks with Douglas Theaters as a replacement. On March 22, 2003, D informed P that it did not intend to build and lease a theater and that its board had rejected the agreement. In August 2003, P entered into a contract with Douglas Theaters P then sued D P appealed the dismissal of its claims.