Local attorney trying to block sale of home to Tre White

[Kwai San]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

 

This is a typical lawyer move.  Trying to squeeze the doc who owns the house for a little bit of cash.  Three days of planning?  Not worth much.  Boo hoo.  It’s just a conniving power play by a couple of guys who are like Martin Prince on the Simpsons.  

 

Also, it is a gorgeous house.  Objectively I can’t say I blame the Cercones for being upset.  It lingered on the market for awhile, but well appointed and good value.  I liked it a lot when I looked at it.  Just didn’t like the taxes. 

 

Never mind...

Edited October 27, 2020 by Kwai San

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

29 minutes ago, teef said:

this even strikes me as a bit low for a house that value.

I’m sure they let you pay more 🤷‍♂️ 

[SoTier]

55 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Yeah, I doubt the broker told Tre "you know what, we have a legal contract, but screw them." And if the broker were the one's who broke the contract without Tre's knowledge of the initial buyers, then Tre will be held blameless.  Which is probably why he is not named in the law suit. 

 

Tre isn't being sued.  It's the real estate reps for the seller and the seller.   If this hadn't involved a Bills player, it wouldn't have even been in the news even in Buffalo Business First.

 

My guess is that Tre is purchasing this house with/for family, so ilikely by the time they decided to make an offer on the house, it was already under contract, but instead of being honest about it, the seller's agent tried to con the buyers into upping their offer.  When they didn't, the agent and seller tried to sell the house to Tre.

[DrDawkinstein]

The listing with pics for anyone interested:

 

https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/11-Kingfisher-Ct_Orchard-Park_NY_14127_M46375-36717

 

Not too shabby for Buffalo

[Shaw66]

If the seller signed a contract with the first buyer, if the first buyer satisfied the conditions necessary to close, and if the seller signed a contract with White, the seller has a real problem.  

 

Each of the two buyers can compel the seller to sell to him - each of the two buyers is entitled to specific performance, because of the two buyers as an enforceable contract for the transfer of real estate.   At least theoretically, if the seller closes with either one of them, the other then can compel the seller to buy it back and then sell it to the second.   The price of the buy back is completely up to whoever just closed.   

 

So Tre pays $750,000 or whatever at the first closing, the other buyer can sue the seller, and the seller will have to buy the house back from Tre at whatever price Tre demands.  Then the seller will have to sell to the other buyer at whatever the contract price was.   

 

Chances are good that if there are two signed contracts, this will cost the seller some dough, like $100,000, to settle.  

[snafu]

4 hours ago, PirateHookerMD said:

"

• On Oct. 13, they were told the Smiths had accepted the offer. A fully executed contract was completed a day later."

I mean, if thats true, pretty straight forward case. 

 

The problem they will have is there are almost always ways to get out of a real-estate deal prior to closing. Sounds like the sellers were somewhat shady though. 

 

A lot of contracts are executed through the Broker, and the terms of the contract provide for a five day "attorney review" period, during which time the contract may be canceled. Perhaps that's the case here.  Not so cut and dry if this is true.

 

 

 

[Seasons1992]

5 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

but, $23 grand in taxes per year 🤮 

 

I enjoyed my time at OPHS, dammit.....but wow that's a lot of tax.

[Augie]

9 hours ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

Can the sellers breach the contract with the original buyers and owe them damages ?

 

As long as all requirements were met, they can be sued for specific performance. We had a deal, the court will MAKE YOU do what the terms of the contract lay out.......unless something wasn’t perfectly executed. It will all come down to what’s in black and white in the contract, and they are all a little bit different. Should be easily decided, but when it comes to money and courts, it’s not always easy. 

 

.

9 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

On A Side note.  I would love to be in an area where a house like that is on the market for less than Multiple Millions.

 

No kidding! Remember: location, location.....and that other thing.

 

I went to a buddies last weekend to watch OSU game. I helped him find the house he’s in. It’s about 30 minutes away with no traffic (this is Atlanta, however). It’s worth about $100k less than our house.  If it was near our house it would be worth TWICE what our house is. It’s in a nice area,  but the location means everything and he’s farther outside of town.

 

Tre’s “maybe house” would be a crazy steal here under $800k.  

 

 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Augie

[Augie]

3 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

The listing with pics for anyone interested:

 

https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/11-Kingfisher-Ct_Orchard-Park_NY_14127_M46375-36717

 

Not too shabby for Buffalo

 

Not too shabby at all! I’m thinking of putting an offer in myself and see how it goes. Wish me luck!!!

[Blokestradamus]

1 hour ago, Augie said:

Not too shabby at all! I’m thinking of putting an offer in myself and see how it goes. Wish me luck!!!

 

Me turning up to put in an offer:

 

Edited October 27, 2020 by Blokestradamus

[Augie]

4 minutes ago, Blokestradamus said:

 

Augie turning to put in his offer:

 

 

WHOA!!! I’n not rich, and I appreciate a good deal! I was thinking of half of that because they seem to like accepting offers so much! 

 

My SIL and her doctor Ex met at Vanderbilt. Not stupid people........for the most part. When they went shopping for their first house they put in offers on 3-4 different places with different Realtors, giving about $5k per deposit. They wanted to “tie them up”. That could have been a disaster,  but they came out unscathed. 

 

No matter how smart you think you are, you never know what you don’t know. 

[Captain Caveman]

9 hours ago, PirateHookerMD said:

"

• On Oct. 13, they were told the Smiths had accepted the offer. A fully executed contract was completed a day later."

I mean, if thats true, pretty straight forward case. 

 

The problem they will have is there are almost always ways to get out of a real-estate deal prior to closing. Sounds like the sellers were somewhat shady though. 

Not really straightforward at all, my understanding (in the middle of a home purchase in NY state right now) is that you get 3 business days from the time the contract is signed for attorney review, during which time either party is able to back out for any reason.  

 

Is it unethical?  Yes.  Is it illegal?  No.  Lawsuit seems either vengeful or frivolous.

[ExiledInIllinois]

12 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Awesome house for $750K.... but, $23 grand in taxes per year 🤮 The taxes almost the same per month as a conventional mortgage would be. 

Cry me a river... Taxes on a house 1/8 that price is more than 1/8 that tax bill... And you don't nearly get the environment and services you do in the O.P.

 

Those are the ones who are footing the bill...

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

9 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Cry me a river... Taxes on a house 1/8 that price is more than 1/8 that tax bill... And you don't nearly get the environment and services you do in the O.P.

 

Those are the ones who are footing the bill...

im not crying, it’s just dumb. I don’t live there. I live somewhere with better environment and services where my 750k is actually an investment and taxes are less than half that. 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just now, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

im not crying, it’s just dumb. I don’t live there. I live somewhere with better environment and services where my 750k is actually an investment and taxes are less than half that. 

Fair.   Give it 30, 40 years when the area starts to age.

[JohnC]

19 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

If the seller signed a contract with the first buyer, if the first buyer satisfied the conditions necessary to close, and if the seller signed a contract with White, the seller has a real problem.  

 

Each of the two buyers can compel the seller to sell to him - each of the two buyers is entitled to specific performance, because of the two buyers as an enforceable contract for the transfer of real estate.   At least theoretically, if the seller closes with either one of them, the other then can compel the seller to buy it back and then sell it to the second.   The price of the buy back is completely up to whoever just closed.   

 

So Tre pays $750,000 or whatever at the first closing, the other buyer can sue the seller, and the seller will have to buy the house back from Tre at whatever price Tre demands.  Then the seller will have to sell to the other buyer at whatever the contract price was.   

 

Chances are good that if there are two signed contracts, this will cost the seller some dough, like $100,000, to settle.  

Why would Tre want to get involved with this legal embroglio? The first buyer acted in good faith with his purchase. It was the seller who acted in bad faith when it appears he made another more lucrative deal while contractually obligated to the first buyer. Even if White has a legal case against the seller why get entangled with looming legal mess? This is civil legal matter. The legal process in this civil system takes time.  The best approach he should take is walk away from this morass and find another mansion.  

[Shaw66]

38 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Why would Tre want to get involved with this legal embroglio? The first buyer acted in good faith with his purchase. It was the seller who acted in bad faith when it appears he made another more lucrative deal while contractually obligated to the first buyer. Even if White has a legal case against the seller why get entangled with looming legal mess? This is civil legal matter. The legal process in this civil system takes time.  The best approach he should take is walk away from this morass and find another mansion.  

I agree with your take on this.  The rational thing to do here if you're second to the party is to get your deposit back and walk away.  Particularly in Tre's case, because he has plenty of dough.  Why would he want to be in the middle of this mess for a year or more?

 

What I was pointing out is that the litigious person in Tre's position could make the claim - it's a really solid claim, written contract for the sale of real estate, it's pretty black letter law - and the seller's lawyer is going to tell the seller that the best thing to do is to pay Tre to make him go away.  It's probably worth $50,000 or more if someone in Tre's position wanted to put up with the headache.  

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree with your take on this.  The rational thing to do here if you're second to the party is to get your deposit back and walk away.  Particularly in Tre's case, because he has plenty of dough.  Why would he want to be in the middle of this mess for a year or more?

 

What I was pointing out is that the litigious person in Tre's position could make the claim - it's a really solid claim, written contract for the sale of real estate, it's pretty black letter law - and the seller's lawyer is going to tell the seller that the best thing to do is to pay Tre to make him go away.  It's probably worth $50,000 or more if someone in Tre's position wanted to put up with the headache.  

 

According to my brother Darryl, Tre White is already in the middle of this mess, and can't just walk away.  He's a named defendant in the case.

 

You get that the lawyer who made the first offer to buy the house sued not just the current owners of the house, but also sued Tre White individually for tortious interference with contract, right?  The article at the link in the original post contains a copy of the summons and complaint in the case.  Scroll down and read the "First Claim For Relief" at page 11 of the 28 page document. 

 

We don't know whether or not Tre White was aware of the fully executed (i.e., fully signed) contract between the plaintiff and the current owners of the house when he made his own, later offer.  I don't know Orchard Park practice, but in many parts of the country, the listing agent will add "Sale Pending" or "Under Contract" to a yard sign to let other potential buyers know that although they are welcome to submit a back-up offer (which could be accepted if the already pending sale fell through for some reason), an existing contract for sale was already in place.  Even without changing the yard sign, it is certainly possible that the listing agent told Tre White or Tre White's agent about the pre-existing, fully signed contract before Tre or Tre's agent submitted Tre's own, later purchase offer.

 

If Tre somehow didn't know about the pre-existing, fully signed purchase offer from the first buyer, he will win the lawsuit brought against him.   Even if he did know about that pre-existing contract, he might still win the suit, but we would need to know more facts to evaluate his chances.

 

There's nothing wrong with submitting a back-up offer, and my guess is that the current owners or their listing agent are much more likely to be culpable here than Tre, but until more facts come out, that's all it is - - just a guess.

[Captain Caveman]

This whole thing is bizarre.  It seems a third attorney sent the seller a letter, claiming to represent the buyer cancelling the contract.  The buyer claims this was actually set up by the Seller as a way of getting out of the contract.

 

I'm not a lawyer, but if I'm reading it right, it appears the seller didn't formally cancel the contract during the Attorney Review period because they had received a letter cancelling the contract from an Attorney claiming to be representing the buyer, so they assumed it was already invalid.  The whole thing is very strange.

 

 

[KD in CA]

On 10/27/2020 at 8:22 AM, bigK14094 said:

I wonder if Tre spends enough time out of NY to not be a NYS resident.   That would mean big bucks to him.......home back down south?  Probabily not, w camps etc.  But, the season and training camp are well short of the 6 months required to be a resident.  I suspect that NYS has special rules on income tax for the professional athletes, but don't know that for sure. Never wondered about that before until this housing discussion.....I too think the signed contract is binding, unless there is a 48 hour escape clause hidden somewhere.

 

Good read here on that subject (and by Bills fans).  And I suspect the states have only upped their aggressive position on residency since this was written.

 

https://www.hodgsonruss.com/media/publication/129_12_2010 The Multistate Tax Quandary For Professional Athletes.pdf