Opinion ID: 1967796
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The 2001 Agreement

Text: EastBanc failed to acquire the Mall during the next two years and, starting in January 2001, Mr. Miller and Mr. Lanier considered modifying their approach. Mr. Miller proposed that he receive a cash payment instead of the 7.5% equity interest described in the 1998 Letter Agreement. The parties continued to negotiate along these lines throughout the spring and summer. In July 2001, Mr. Miller, Mr. Lanier, and EastBanc signed a new agreement (the 2001 Agreement) that changed the method for compensating Mr. Miller. EastBanc agreed to pay Mr. Miller a $3 million waiver fee if it acquired the Mall by May 31, 2002 (the Outside Closing Date). In exchange, Mr. Miller promised to exercise (or refrain from exercising) the ROFO to benefit EastBanc and Mr. Lanier, and otherwise assist Lanier to facilitate the acquisition of the Property by Lanier, Eastbanc [2] or the Lanier Entity. The 2001 Agreement stated that it modifie[d] only the benefit to which Miller will be entitled for fulfilling his obligations set forth in the [1998] Letter Agreement and in this Agreement by substituting the Waiver Fee for, the previously promised equity interest. The Parties agree[d] that the modification to the [1998] Letter Agreement set forth in this Agreement will terminate as of the Outside Closing Date. The 2001 Agreement memorialized serious disagreements about what would happen if EastBanc was not able to close on the Mall by May 31, 2002. Miller maintained] that the Letter Agreement has expired in accordance with its terms and is no longer of any force and effect. On the other hand, the Lanier Parties maintain[ed] that the Letter Agreement remains in full force and effect and will remain in full force and effect after the Outside Closing Date. Apparently agreeing to disagree, the parties stated that they do not desire by the terms of this Agreement to either extend or cut short the term of the Letter Agreement or prejudice in any manner the arguments of either party thereto. Mr. Lanier considered some of these statements by Mr. Miller to be mere posturing to improve his leverage when negotiating for an amendment to the 1998 Letter Agreement. [3] Despite continued efforts to acquire the Property before May 31, 2002, EastBanc and GPA II were not able to do so, and the 2001 Agreement expired according to its terms.