whether the letter of one attorney sent to another attorney can as a matter of law constitute duress in a contract case and you can dispose of this entire case thousand three saying the disagreement supersedes and replaces in all other agreements including without limitation in agreement dated july fourteenth two thousand and three between the parties for the provision of formation invalidity existence of the order anyone questioning or affecting the politically ancillary documents or the consummation of any transactions contemplated or any way questioning were contesting the validity of a that's correct but whether it was complied we question number one whether there was a contract at all we question number two whether given in terms of the contract of that document there was any breach by because what eagle home was negotiating for in effect the sewage treatment plant was completed in the you had access to that facility it was done under the two thousand six agreement which everyone agree schaefer system that was contemplated at that time in the two thousand and four green which she was never able to be financed was never able to be started was never able to be completed so that any tree trimming that was necessary for evil known to do anything beyond fifty home construction that never came to fruition therefore there was no trigger for the beginning of the two thousand and three contract and whether there was  entering into the room and dispensary syria would likely have gone into effect and either way they were still going to get what they had in effect wanted them with sewage treatment for the development that they were going to get the same cost at the same and that's exactly what happened in this case in eagle homes in all the meetings equal homelessness was participated in all the emails eagle homes said let's do it client we got a nasty letter from the other side who goes with it but it's what happened here if this case would not have existed but for mr dunn's letter this case should not exist this key should not be able to be found in favor of in and frankly this is generally how our system works fortunately no longer in a position where the way in which disputes are resolved as you show up in the middle of main street you do it and figure it out that way was part of an entire process of negotiation started back started big major five but at least when you go holmes knew that there was not going to be any more construction in august two thousand and five sending letters back and forth sing  exactly like the deal in the case where the high seas that caused the damage to that barge were not contemplated by the parties when they created the agreement the crash in the real estate economy was not contemplated by the parties at the time the two thousand three hundred room it was was reached so that those delays damages were not part of the complaint were not part of the contemplation of the parties and should not have been considered by the jury in creating damages development in may of two thousand and five was a very significant event because it was the satisfaction of the condition preceding to the town performance that dove tails with one of your questions just the facts and in these what what what was a what were the conditions of the contract that needed to be satisfied and in those conditions or as it pertains to the new development in favor of the eagle homes call for the construction of over five hundred units of various types over five hundred unions person which which will be served by the sanitary sewer system interior sewer system the schaefer agreement had been entered into with the town the prior year april two thousand and four so at this may two thousand five meeting the town first here's a report from schaefer or shaper says they are his words not mine where they develop other to no purpose that were in line to be served by phase two of this plant began to his words dictate what was going to happen and changing the paradigm if you will the change was from a seven hundred fifty thousand system facing one which would serve the existing town in eagle to a one point five million gallons system that would serve not only the existing town simply saying the practical realities here become to rest he said you can't beat their breasts in context first off the letter with written after having been reviewed and approved by the mayor so it was not a r the most if it did to prove it one of the most significant and expensive improvements pursuant to the agreement was the installation of the eighteen inch sewer main that would connect to the existing town to the new treatment plant because the written agreement the two thousand and three agreement had two conditions for my client to primary conditions now with the payment of the million dollars but also the installation on eagle's property it enables expense of this sewer connection to connect the existing town going to get a sewer in other words the town's move to reach agreement and what you're going to be left with is having to go to your bank and explain why you're three million dollars in the ground with no security sewer we mention some of the cases i mean both of which were decided by this court where duress was allowed to be found in circumstances that i would submit are much less onerous than this one the one that comes to mind is raintree we can't do business in your town and our customers want to do business in your town and there was never any protest by the way filed at the time of payment was made but this court said under those circumstances where the developer is left without the ability to do business in the out about the fact that you had a deal number two i want more money from you the original buyer paid the more money then after completing both transactions suit his by saying i only paid you then he realized his project was going to be delayed and he could not deliver on those contracts so if they have a point in time he began refunding deposits and cancelling contracts so in your interest see how many are still in place evidence offered by the town by way of expert testimony for wise in the damages evidence i would submit one is very conservative conservative in the act we took into account the economic circumstances created by a good collapse of the residential real estate market in did not see gaining damages once their period begin to run and we took into account in factored into the damages the payment of the one million d eagle would have paid had the contract not been breached so all the evidence was was i would submit rather unassailable in that period conservative assumptions were made of the period of sale the amount of units that would have think in the crowley case this court was faced with the question of whether to allow the defense of duress to be used as a sword in made available were contracts with the other developers that were different particles contained in the two thousand and three and by accepting the terms and conditions of the two thousand and six agreement you can't have it both ways you can't have void you can't do anything consistent with the two thousand and six agreement you cannot accept any of the benefits of the two thousand and six goes and benefits in the nature of money we were not in the insurance money they were in the nature of having access to with additional damages would have been substantial but we disagree with one thing that all the consequential incidental damages of critics threatened breach could not have been recovered through judicial proceedings moreover bunty sex no authority for its proposition for the inconvenience