Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 20 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Casino tied up in lawsuit
Published Friday, April 18, 2008
NATCHEZ — The Grand Soleil is facing a lawsuit filed by former property owner Charles Cato, but the suit won’t affect construction plans, casino officials said.
Cato, who filed his suit in February, said Grand Soleil never paid him for the property.
The lawsuit was filed in St. Petersburg, Fla., where Cato lives.
Cato sold the property to Grand Soleil and he claims that the company never paid for the property.
“There was a purchase agreement for them to purchase the property and they never paid one dime of it,” Cato said.
Cato’s suit seeks to get the land back.
He said if he gets the land back, he still plans to build the casino.
“I do want to see the casino built,” he said.
Grand Soleil, in turn, has filed a lawsuit against Cato.
Kent Hudson, general counsel to Grand Soleil, said the lawsuit concerns issues over the contract Cato and Grand Soleil signed.
“Mainly it’s contractual matters that go back to the underlying agreements with the parties,” Hudson said.
Basically, in the contract that was signed, it stated that if either party ever had a disagreement, no lawsuits should be filed to resolve the issues.
Instead, the contract stated that the parties would go before an arbitrator in Jackson to resolve any problems.
Hudson said contractual issues like these are common.
“Most contracts, unfortunately, are subject to multiple interpretations and each party might have their take on how that should be interpreted,” Hudson said. “Frequently people have different issues regarding contractual obligations.”
Baxter Lee, marketing director for Grand Soleil, agreed with that sentiment.
“In any business it seems these days litigation is a part of it and we’re certainly not an industry that is immune to it,” Lee said. “In no way will this slow us down or slow down our construction.”
“We’re moving forward with all intentions and plans of opening this fall.”
Grand Soleil came under question several weeks ago when construction slowed down and heavy machinery was removed from the construction site.
This, Lee had said, was due to a transition in construction.
Currently, equipment and steel are being delivered and are arriving at the site and construction will pick back up within the next few days, Lee said.
Comments
Posted by ogitchidaa (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 1:27 a.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Choctaw (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 1:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If that had been me selling my property to anyone,,,,,They would have paid me my money BEFORE one bucket load of dirt was moved!
A lot of work has been completed at the new Casino site! It would be ashame for Grand Soleil to lose that lawsuit and have to return the property! But I'm sure they would get back what they have sunk into that project!
Posted by fire39212 (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 5:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm with you Choctaw...Wonder why he allowed them to do any work without any money?
Posted by sayitloud (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 5:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Things that make you go Hmmmm...
Posted by niderbip (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 6:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
if they gave no consideration for the property, the contract may be null and void.
Posted by CitizenSane (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, the sleaze factor seems to be off the charts already and the thing isn't even finished.
On the other hand, these are the kind of people that a lot of Natchez citizens think are going to save the town.
Good roles models for our children and all that.
Apparently, the good folks at the Natchez Democrat think the whole town should be a casino vilage. Bring in the land-based casinos, say the editors.
Before editorializing so authoritatively on a such a serious topic, our local journalistic influence leaders would do well to benefit from a little research on the legislative history of the state gaming laws, as well as the effects of uncontrolled land-based gambling on other communities.
Posted by SayItRight (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 7:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This story doesn't make sense to me. There has to be alot more to it. You don't close a land deal without tying up all the loose ends. If he was desperate to sell it and/or get it out of his name he may have agreed to something where he didn't get the money right away............let's hear more about this one.
Posted by ogitchidaa (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This Natchez Casino is also the main reason a tribe in Wisconsin is bankrupt, along with major political fallout. There was a takeover staged a few weeks ago, and there is a major protest happening right at the moment. Make sure to see the big cop with the mace.
http://www.rhinelanderdailynews.com/arti...
http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/27...
Posted by NtzMom55 (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Wisconsin State Journal
April 18, 2008
"Tribe money misspent?"
"The 3,000-member tribe has been hit hard by a series of bad business investments which tribal members say could take years to correct."
"Those include three multimillion-dollar off-reservation casino projects, including a failed $3.5 million casino cruise ship venture that was originally destined for Mexico but is now docked in Tampa Bay, Fla.; a proposed casino in Shullsburg, which was recently nixed by federal authorities; and a second gaming boat and hotel complex in Natchez, Miss., which is the focus of a lawsuit between the tribe and one of its business partners."
So, this is what we really need in Natchez?
Posted by GopherBaroque (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 10:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Isn't it interesting how The Natchez Democrat allows comment on this forum and then censors it? Only opinions which are acceptable to the Democrat and not all opionions are allowed.
Posted by CHall1229 (Christina Hall) on April 18, 2008 at 10:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What is truly interesting are the comments that people write on here, sometimes without regard to truth. Freedom of Speech does not entitle people to slander, defame, spread idle gossip, or belittle other people. While I am not part of who decides what stays on the different sites I am amazed at what people will say.
Posted by cynthiafleming (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People will say and think what they like but Natchez is much better economically than they were before the days of the casino. Wheather or not you frequent the casino is a matter of choice. However, they contribute a great deal to the community both in jobs and in revenue. The people who work for the casino are just trying to make a living for their families just like everyone else. I am very much looking forward to the completion of the Grand Soleil so that they too can contribute to the economy of Natchez and the recreation of gaming.
Posted by damifino (Gale Coleman) on April 18, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm with you, Christina...ESPECIALLY during the sheriffs election in Concordia...it was a free-for-all for the ones opposing Sheriff Maxwell!
Posted by natchez1 (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Charles was the original person involved with the old Emerald Star, he could not raise enough money on his own so he partnered with others. He now is in disagreement with those partners over how much his original investment was worth. He bought the Briars and the Ramada and the land under the bluff. He is still a partner in the new casino, just a relatively minor one.
It is a dispute over a little money - not unusual in project like this.
The Native Americans involved were ripped off by their last "partners" with the Mexican boat. They are now a little wiser and more suspious!
Everything seems to be progressing, I hope they can make it very successful!
Posted by CHall1229 (Christina Hall) on April 18, 2008 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm in agreement wtih you cynthiafleming. I am not a big fan of the boat simply because it doesnt' appeal to me. I am a big fan of boosting our economy, providing jobs and bringing visitors to town. I hope the new ones and the one we have do well so that in turn their workers do well.
Posted by cooper3k1 (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The part in the contract about not being able to sue each other is very common. Anytime you borrow money from a bank or finance company, you sign an Arbitration Agreement. It saves the customers and lender money by going to court without a jury and the outcome being determined by a judge, who is the "arbitrator." It is nothing that should cause an alarm when signing a contract because it is very common.
Posted by destiny (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
GOPHERBAROQUE; The N.D. only steps in to delete a post if a poster finds it offensive. Check to the right of the name of the poster it says (suggest removal) if it offends whoever then that poster will click it, this alerts the N.D. Some times they will delete it, some times not. At, Post a comment, you will find (Terms of Use Policy) click there and you will read what the terms are. Every thing is clearly stated. When I first started blogging, there were a lot of nasties on here that wanted to use this medium to spew their hatred. Thank the good Lord most of them got tired of being deleted and went away. We still have a few, but they can be ignored. I love to read the comments of others when they are not constantly putting others down. It's very refreshing to have it as part of my day and I try often to express this to the N.D and express my thanks for having this space for us. Hope you have a happy day.
Posted by ogitchidaa (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I originally did not post anything offensive, but it did touch someone politically connected. I also suggested that the Mississippi gaming commission is not doing their best in overseeing this project, and so I am sure that the politically connected people do not want this information out. Perhaps this story needs to get out to your legislators and other media sources, so that things cannot be so hidden. A town such as yours does deserve honest, decent people.
Posted by xfloodman (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 1:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I too am in agreement with Christina. I can remember working at Armstrong Rubber Co. and being proud to have one of the jobs in the Natchez industrial market. By the way, what happened to all of the thriving plants here? It almost seems like a plague came through and everything was gone. Now one must compete for a job at Wal-Mart or the Isle of Capri, but don't let me leave out the numerous car dealerships.
Posted by sammohon (anonymous) on April 18, 2008 at 6:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Follow the money...I suspect, from reading the stories in Wisconsin, that the failed casino boat and the Federal rejection of their other casino investment overextended the tribe.
In their desperation to cover the lost assets, they probably tried to increase the value of their assets at Grand Soliel by reducing the value of Cato's assets, thereby creating the row. I have no proof of this, but it seems to be a likely scenario.
There are two kinds of arbitration, binding and non-binding. Depending on the language of the contract, sometimes you can sue and sometimes you can't. Arbitration doesn't have a judge or jury, but a trained arbitrator, usually an attorney or retired judge. Binding arbitration requires the parties abide by the decision of the third party arbitrator. Non-binding arbitration is no more than a negotiation to try to settle disputes without going to court. If it fails, the parties may sue.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)