Answering Statement and Request for Dismissal by Gainesville ..
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
III. ARGUMENT<br />
A. The PPA Precludes Specific Per<strong>for</strong>mance, the Remedy GRU Seeks.<br />
Section 26.1 of the PPA precludes specific per<strong>for</strong>mance as a remedy:<br />
See PPA § 26.1.<br />
. . . If no remedy or measure of damage s is expressly provided herein, the<br />
obligor’s liability shall be limited to direct actual damages only, such<br />
direct actual damages shall be the so le <strong>and</strong> exclusive remedy <strong>and</strong> all other<br />
remedies or damages at law or in equity are waived. . . .<br />
Section 27.3, the provision GRU relies on <strong>for</strong> it s claim that it was entitled to a Right of<br />
First Offer, does not “expressly provide[ ]” <strong>for</strong> any remedy or measure of damages in the event<br />
of a breach. Absent another remedy or measur e of damages expressly provided, Section 26.1 of<br />
the PPA clearly limits GREC’s liability <strong>for</strong> any alleged breach to “direct actual damages only.”<br />
GRU has waived “all other remedies or damages at law or in equity.”<br />
In its original dem<strong>and</strong>, GRU sought “specific<br />
specifically to include providing GRU with the oppor<br />
per<strong>for</strong>mance of the Right of First Offer,<br />
tunity to make an offer to purchase the<br />
Facility.” Dem<strong>and</strong> at 27. In its Amende d Dem<strong>and</strong>, GRU seeks to <strong>by</strong>pass the ROFO process<br />
<strong>and</strong> requests an order directing GREC to sell th e entire Facility to GRU. Amended Dem<strong>and</strong> at<br />
31. The relief GRU seeks in its Amended Dem<strong>and</strong> – an order directing GREC to sell the entire<br />
Facility to GRU – still is specific per<strong>for</strong>mance, an equitable remedy. See LaGorce Palace<br />
Condo Assoc., Inc. v. QBE Ins. Corp. , 733 F. Supp. 2d 1332, 1334 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (“Specific<br />
per<strong>for</strong>mance is an equitable remedy as opposed to a legal cause of action.”). For this reason,<br />
GRU’s Amended Dem<strong>and</strong> is fatally flawed <strong>and</strong> the Arbitrator should dismiss it in its entirety.<br />
B. There Has Been No Sale of the Facility, Di rectly or Indirectly Through a “Change<br />
Of Control” of GREC.<br />
Setting aside GRU’s failure to comply with<br />
the notice requirement <strong>and</strong> request <strong>for</strong> an<br />
impermissible remedy, GRU fails to assert any ba sis <strong>for</strong> liability against GREC because GREC<br />
has not breached Section 27.3, nor any other section, of the PPA . GRU contends that GREC<br />
A/75508616.1<br />
17