Common use of Fort Clause in Contracts

Fort. The complaint alleges that a former employee of FFCA's predecessor in interest, FFCA/IIP 1986 Property Company ("IIP 86"), Wxxxxxx X. Fort and other officers of IIP 86 misrepresented to the Plaintiffs that C. Rxxxx Xxxxx ("Lxxxx") and his related entities were extremely trustworthy, creditworthy and had sufficient net worth to acquire the restaurant business owned by the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs contend that, as a result of those misrepresentations, they entered into an agreement with Lxxxx and an affiliated entity for the management and acquisition of Plaintiffs' businesses. The complaint alleges that Lxxxx and his affiliated entity mismanaged Plaintiffs' businesses and were financially unable to consummate the acquisition thereof, causing Plaintiffs to lose their businesses and sustain compensatory damages in the amount of $3,000,000. Based upon its inquiry, IIP 86 believes that the allegations contained in the complaint are without merit. Plaintiffs have not actively prosecuted this case since the filing date. However, FFCA intends to vigorously defend this action and assert counterclaims against the Plaintiffs resulting from breach of two lease agreements and guaranties.

Fort. The complaint alleges that xxxxxxx xhat a former employee of FFCA's predecessor in interest, FFCA/IIP 1986 Property Company ("IIP 86"), Wxxxxxx X. William E. Fort and other officers of IIP officexx xx XXX 86 misrepresented to the Plaintiffs that C. Rxxxx Xxxxx Randy Lance ("LxxxxLance") and his related entities xxxxxxx entixxxx were extremely trustworthy, creditworthy and had sufficient net worth to acquire the restaurant business owned by the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs contend that, as a result of those misrepresentations, they entered into an agreement with Lxxxx Lance and an affiliated entity for the fxx xxe management and acquisition of Plaintiffs' businesses. The complaint alleges that Lxxxx Lance and his affiliated entity mismanaged xxxxanaged Plaintiffs' businesses and were financially unable to consummate the acquisition thereof, causing Plaintiffs to lose their businesses and sustain compensatory damages in the amount of $3,000,000. Based upon its inquiry, IIP 86 believes that the allegations contained in the complaint are without merit. Plaintiffs have not actively prosecuted this case since the filing date. However, FFCA intends to vigorously defend this action and assert counterclaims against the Plaintiffs resulting from breach of two lease agreements and guaranties.

Fort. The complaint alleges that a former employee of FFCA's predecessor in interest, FFCA/IIP 1986 Property Company ("IIP 86"), Wxxxxxx Xxxxxxx X. Fort and other officers of IIP 86 misrepresented to the Plaintiffs that C. Rxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxx ("LxxxxXxxxx") and his related entities were extremely trustworthy, creditworthy and had sufficient net worth to acquire the restaurant business owned by the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs contend that, as a result of those misrepresentations, they entered into an agreement with Lxxxx Xxxxx and an affiliated entity for the management and acquisition of Plaintiffs' businesses. The complaint alleges that Lxxxx Xxxxx and his affiliated entity mismanaged Plaintiffs' businesses and were financially unable to consummate the acquisition thereof, causing Plaintiffs to lose their businesses and sustain compensatory damages in the amount of $3,000,000. Based upon its inquiry, IIP 86 believes that the allegations contained in the complaint are without merit. Plaintiffs have not actively prosecuted this case since the filing date. However, FFCA intends to vigorously defend this action and assert counterclaims against the Plaintiffs resulting from breach of two lease agreements and guaranties.

Fort. The complaint alleges complainx xxxxxxx that a former employee of FFCA's predecessor in interest, FFCA/IIP 1986 Property Company ("IIP 86"), Wxxxxxx X. William E. Fort and other officers of IIP offixxxx xx XXP 86 misrepresented to the Plaintiffs that C. Rxxxx Xxxxx Randy Lance ("LxxxxLance") and his related entities hxx xxxxxxx enxxxxxs were extremely trustworthy, creditworthy and had sufficient net worth to acquire the restaurant business owned by the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs contend that, as a result of those misrepresentations, they entered into an agreement with Lxxxx Lance and an affiliated entity for xxx the management and acquisition of Plaintiffs' businesses. The complaint alleges that Lxxxx Lance and his affiliated entity mismanaged entitx xxsmanaged Plaintiffs' businesses and were financially unable to consummate the acquisition thereof, causing Plaintiffs Plaintiff to lose their businesses and sustain sustained compensatory damages in the amount of $3,000,000. Based upon its inquiry, IIP 86 believes that the allegations contained in the complaint are without merit. Plaintiffs have not actively prosecuted this case since the filing date. However, FFCA intends to vigorously defend this action and assert counterclaims against the Plaintiffs resulting from breach of two lease agreements and guaranties.