08.03.2024 Views

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!