Go pound sand: Indiana Supreme Court rules against Team Gahan v.v. the frivolous City County Building lawsuit.

0
55

The link: City of New Albany v. Board of Commissioners of the County of Floyd

Let’s begin with excellent words suitable for you-know-who.

Pounding sand, Shane?

There are two takes on go pound sand. The more recent, seemingly a product of World War II, and often euphemised, is go pound sand up one’s (rear end). It is used to dismiss and deride, and is ultimately a vehement way of saying: “go away”…A variant meaning is to suffer or to act in a pointless manner … the late 19th century phrase “pound sand in a rathole” originated on campus and meant to be reasonably intelligent. It was usually found in the negative phrase, “not enough sense to pound sand in a rat hole.”

Pounding sand used to be a good thing — a sensible task undertaken by a person wise in the ways of rodent control — until it became a bad thing — a painful act of self-abasement — and then morphed into a simple act of futility.

I’m obviously not an attorney, and the joy I’m deriving from this court decision derives from the stinging rebuke to Gahanism.

The lease expired in September 2008, and thereafter, the City and the County continued to occupy the Center, splitting the costs proportionally, based on the amount of space each occupied. In 2015, the County began negotiations with Building Authority for renovations of the Center. In 2018, the County requested that the Building Authority transfer title of the Center to the County pursuant to the Turn-Over Provision in the parties’ lease.

The Building Authority declined to transfer title and the County filed suit in April of 2018, seeking declaratory judgment and specific performance, among other things. At the county’s request, the trial court expedited the proceedings. In May 2018, the trial court granted the City of New Albany’s request to intervene. In June 2018, the trial court entered declaratory judgment in favor of the County, concluding that the Turn-Over Provision in the lease was valid pursuant to Indiana Code section 36-9-13-22(a)(6). It ordered that the title be given to the County and dismissed all other pending claims.

The City appealed arguing that under Indiana Code section 36-9-13, the Turn-Over Provision was not valid. The Court of Appeals agreed and Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 19S-MI-674 | March 23, 2020 Page 4 of 7 further held, sua sponte, that the County, as a holdover tenant could still exercise the purchase option in the lease. City of New Albany v. Bd. of Comm’rs of Cty. of Floyd, 125 N.E.3d 636, 641 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019), adhered to on reh’g, 130 N.E.3d 660 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019), and trans. granted, opinion vacated, 138 N.E.3d 961 (Ind. 2019). Both parties petitioned for transfer, which we granted. Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A).

In short, the Indiana Supreme Court found in favor of the original trial court ruling, and all you really need to know is the defeat constitutes egg on Dear Leader’s face.

Actually it isn’t the only thing.

How much did this frivolous lawsuit cost city and county? Anyone for an on-line petition demanding the mayor pay court costs?

On Gahan’s $10,000,000 City-County Building escape plan as a tactic to disrupt his ancestral enemies in county government.

LEAVE A REPLY