NBV Loan Acquisition, LLC v. Lexi Dev. Co. (In re Lexi Dev. Co.)

603 B.R. 190
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida.
DecidedJune 6, 2019
DocketCase No. 10-27573-BKC-AJC; Adv. No. 16-1754-BKC-AJC-A
StatusPublished

This text of 603 B.R. 190 (NBV Loan Acquisition, LLC v. Lexi Dev. Co. (In re Lexi Dev. Co.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
NBV Loan Acquisition, LLC v. Lexi Dev. Co. (In re Lexi Dev. Co.), 603 B.R. 190 (Fla. 2019).

Opinion

A. Jay Cristol, Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court

THIS CAUSE came before the Court for trial on January 22-30, February 1, 11, 22 and March 15, 2019 upon Count I of Plaintiff's Verified Amended Complaint. ECF No. 1-201.2

INTRODUCTION

This case has its genesis in a $ 56,000,000 loan (the "Senior Loan") made by *192Regions Bank (and others) to Lexi Development Corp. ("Debtor") to fund construction of a multipurpose condominium. In normal financial times, the project would have been completed, the condominium units would have been sold, the bank(s) would have been repaid and Lexi would have retained the profits, if any. However, the date of the loan, December 5, 2005, was the edge of a cliff that the economy was about to fall over.

The Court takes judicial notice of the downturn in the economy, which was named by many as a recession (and by some as the "Great Recession"), and which continued from late 2005 through 2008, and for years thereafter. These years were the worst of times for condominium developers in Miami-Dade County. As a result of the collapsed market, the Lexi condos did not sell out and the initial loan could not be repaid when due on April 5, 2008.

NBV sued Regions3 for breach of contract for failing to provide copies of five default letters to Lexi's junior lenders, the Greenwald Parents and Greenwald Parents' lender, GFB, as required under an Intercreditor Agreement ("ICA") and subsequent Letter Agreement. Plaintiff NBV claims that the banks' failure to send the notices of the Debtor's default on the loan, which was required under the ICA in this series of transactions, caused it damages.

As it was undisputed that Plaintiff, or rather its predecessor GFB, did not receive the required default notices, and Plaintiff entered trial with a partial summary judgment establishing the breach of the notice requirement under the ICA, and thus, liability for any damages caused by the breach. The Court reserved for trial the issue of damages that were caused by such breach. ECF No. 254.4

The Plaintiff was given the opportunity, in an eleven-day trial, to prove damages caused by the breach; however, not a scintilla of evidence proved that any damages to the Plaintiff were caused by its not receiving the default notice required by the ICA. At the inception of trial, NBV claimed damages of $ 14,629,325 for unpaid principal and interest on the entirety of the GFB-Lexi Loan (defined below), plus attorney's fees and costs. See 1/22/19 Tr. at 3:19-4:2. By the end of the trial, NBV was alternatively seeking:

(1) $ 3.35 million, representing the amount paid by Lexi to North Bay to settle North Bay's claim for default-rate interest on the Senior Loan [as defined below], plus pre-judgment interest;
(2) All attorney's fees, costs and other administrative expenses incurred by Lexi in defending North Bay's foreclosure and in the Lexi bankruptcy case; and
(3) All attorney's fees and costs incurred by NBV in pursuing its claims and interests in litigating against North Bay and Lexi.

ECF No. 558 at 23.

Without addressing Plaintiff's ability to recover Lexi's damages, the Court finds that, on the evidence presented at trial, NBV cannot recover at all against Regions on any damage theory because Regions' failure to provide copies of the default notices to GFB did not cause nonpayment *193of the GFB-Lexi Loan or any other loss or damage that GFB claims. Instead, the evidence established that Regions acted in the best of good faith. It not only worked with the parties, modifying its loan agreement, extending the maturity date by a full year, and modifying release clauses to allow sales of some condominium units, but it also allowed the use of its cash collateral to pay operating expenses. Additionally, after several negotiations to try to work out the financing problems, it sold the loan to an entity that offered an additional extension of the loan for three years at contract rate interest - which offer was rejected.

The evidence presented proves that Regions acted in good faith in an effort to work out the financial distress caused by the economic downturn. The Court finds the evidence failed to prove that NBV suffered any damage by not receiving the default notices. Although the Plaintiff asserts that the testimony of both Scott Greenwald and Mehdi Ghomeshi establishes that GFB would have cured the default and avoided additional expenses if it had received notice of Debtor's default, the Court finds the testimony of those witnesses to lack credibility and sincerity. In fact, the Court finds that GFB, and Mehdi Ghomeshi, were well aware of Lexi's default on the Senior Loan and the ongoing negotiations between Scott Greenwald, on behalf of the Debtor, and Regions Bank; and notwithstanding the knowledge of the default and the negotiations, GFB chose to forego exercising its options to purchase the loan or to cure Lexi's default thereunder.

Plaintiff's arguments-that GFB did not contact Regions to provide a cure once it learned of the default because the ICA did not give GFB the right to do so and it did not want to subject itself to lender liability-are similarly insincere and wholly without merit. The evidence proves that GFB always had the right to purchase the Senior Loan at par.5 But whether GFB believed Scott would work things out with Regions or whether the economic climate of the time prevented the purchase of the Senior Loan, GFB never chose to purchase the Senior Loan. GFB repeatedly rejected opportunities to purchase the Senior Loan as requested by Scott, or finance Allen's purchase of the Senior Loan, or finance Lexi's restructure with North Bay, or exercise GFB's option to purchase the Senior Loan in September 2009 when North Bay offered to sell at par (i.e. contract-rate interest) or exercise its option to purchase the Senior Loan in June 2010 when GFB learned of Lexi's bankruptcy. Moreover, GFB never sought to mitigate any potential loss by seeking to collect from the Greenwalds, the obligors and guarantors.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The evidence presented was tedious and the testimony of the ten witnesses over an extended period was redundant; but generally, the Court found the witnesses to be candid, forthcoming and credible, with the exception of Scott Greenwald and Mehdi Ghomeshi, who were simply not credible or persuasive on certain critical issues. Based upon the evidence presented and the Court's assessment of each witness' credibility, the Court finds as follows:

*194A. The Parties

1. NBV is a Delaware limited liability company whose sole member is NBV Loan Acquisition Member, LLC ("NBV Member"), a Florida limited liability company, whose sole member has been Allen since inception.

2. Lexi is the Debtor-in-Possession and a Florida corporation, owned and controlled by Allen and Scott, which developed a mixed use residential and retail condominium, The Lexi, in North Bay Village. ECF No. 15-3 at 38.

3. Regions is an Alabama bank and was the administrative agent and co-lender of the Senior Loan.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Vega v. T-MOBILE USA, INC.
564 F.3d 1256 (Eleventh Circuit, 2009)
Friedman v. New York Life Ins. Co.
985 So. 2d 56 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
Banks v. Salina
413 So. 2d 851 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Winter v. American Automobile Association
149 So. 2d 386 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1963)
Air Caledonie International v. AAR Parts Trading, Inc.
315 F. Supp. 2d 1319 (S.D. Florida, 2004)
Bland v. FREIGHTLINER LLC
206 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (M.D. Florida, 2002)
PNC Bank v. Branch Banking and Trust Co.
704 F. Supp. 2d 1229 (M.D. Florida, 2010)
Allapattah Services, Inc. v. Exxon Corp.
61 F. Supp. 2d 1326 (S.D. Florida, 1999)
System Components Corp. v. Florida Deparment of Transportation
14 So. 3d 967 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2009)
Moses v. Autuono
56 Fla. 499 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1908)
Messer v. E.F. Hutton & Co.
833 F.2d 909 (Eleventh Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
603 B.R. 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nbv-loan-acquisition-llc-v-lexi-dev-co-in-re-lexi-dev-co-flsb-2019.