Thomas Breen photo
Scores owner Peter Forchetti, lawyer Anthony DiCrosta in court.
A state appeals court has sided with Scores strip club’s argument that the latter should not be on the hook for $2.45 million. Even if its refusal to budge from a dilapidated clock factory torpedoes an estimated $38 million new housing development.
On Wednesday, a clerk with the State of Connecticut Appellate Court signed an order requiring state Superior Court Judge John Cordani to set a new appeal bond in the legal battle between the owners of Scores and the Portland, Oregon-based Clock Shop Lofts developers.
The developers have sought for months to evict the strip club from their 85 Saint John St. location to make way for 130 new affordable apartments and artists lofts at the contaminated former clock factory at 133 Hamilton St.
Click here to read the appellate court’s order.
At the end of March, Cordani set a $2.45 million appeal bond for the Scores owners to post if they wanted to stay in their current place of operations as they appeal the housing court judge’s initial eviction order.
Scores at 85 Saint John St.
Based on in-court testimony from Reed Community Partners Director of Historic Redevelopment and Government Affairs Josh Blevins, Cordani estimated that the developers stood to lose $1.2 million in carrying costs if Scores remained in place during an 18-month appeal. He also recognized that the developers would likely default on the $1.25 million mortgage note they took out to purchase the property in 2018. Thus the $2.45 million appeal bond total.
Cordani gave the Scores owners until April 1 to post that amount in cash or collateral in order to keep the strip club in place over the course of the appeal.
On April 1, Scores’ lawyer, Anthony DiCrosta, filed a motion for review, arguing that the $2.45 million appeal bond was excessively high and that the five-day deadline to post it was arbitrarily short.
And on Wednesday, the appellate court agreed.
The designs for the new Clock Shop Lofts.
”The relief requested therein is granted,” the new appellate court order reads, “in that the trial court is ordered to set a new appeal bond consistent with its findings as to the plaintiff’s carrying costs for the anticipated duration of the appeal.”
However, the order reads, this new appeal bond cannot include the $1.25 million principal on the purchase note that he developers say they are at risk of defaulting on if the strip club remains in place for another year or 18 months.
As I read the order, it is not as significant as the first section indicates. The club will have to come up with a bond of $1.2 million in cash or collateral, rather than $2.45 million. This is a major reduction, but I suspect the club owners don't have the former amount in their back pocket.