Click here to view original article.
By Paul Brinkmann
November 27, 2012
Miami Beach lender LNR Partners is seeking to overturn a loss handed to it Friday by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge A.J. Cristol in the Sagamore Hotel foreclosure dispute.
On Friday, Cristol ruled that LNR had the right to foreclose, but never properly notified Sagamore and its attorneys of default. Cristol said LNR should re-notify Taplin, and provide him 10 days to cure the loan default.
LNR responded with a 14-page emergency motion Monday telling the judge why he was wrong and seeking reconsideration. Sagamore immediately filed a response saying the judge was right.
The crux of the follow-up motions is whether the original loan agreement required notice of default and an opportunity to cure the default.
Not surprisingly, attorneys for LNR and Sagamore offer very different interpretations:
• LNR Partners quotes the loan agreement as saying: “In no event shall any provision of this Agreement or any other Loan Document… be construed so as to require Lender to accept a cure of any such Event of Default.”
• Sagamore Partners quotes the loan agreement as saying: “If Borrower fails to perform any covenant contained herein… such failure shall continue for a period of ten (10) business days after the Borrower’s receipt of written notice thereof from Lender.”
LNR is represented by Scott Baena of Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod. Sagamore is represented by Isaac Jaroslawicz and Peter Russin of Meland Russin & Budwick.