https://madisonrecord.com/stories/511553952-k-mart-to-sell-florida-distribution-center-to-pay-tillery-whistleblower-settlement
Had to sell a distribution center to pay for a lawsuit yea, things are “a ok” right?
8 replies (most recent on top)
Yeah, I know what mortgage means. Thanks for your jerky response though. I was just pointing out that SHC does not own the property outright, so part of the proceeds of the sale will go to the company and individual (Ireland) holding the mortgage. It makes me wonder how much of the real estate that SHC "owns" is also mortgaged.
The link in the post below may not work; this site actually censored some of the words in the link!
Another article explaining what this case was about.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/kmart-pays-353m-to-settle-hard-fought-whistleblower-case-alleging-inflated-pr-scrip-ion-d--g-prices-300575189.html
WoW, you don't even know what mortgage means. Didn't you ever play Monopoly as a kid? Why did you mortgage things? O yea you did not have enough money! If you had bothered to read and comprehend you would see that;
"“The court’s approval of this settlement is contingent on the closing of the two properties serving as security for the settlement amount,” Rosenstengel wrote. "
since you cant lookup the meaning of words I have including what "closing" means in this context.
"the seller signs certain documents transferring property ownership. You (buyer) receive and sign documents related to the mortgage agreement and ownership of the property"
The way I understand it, the property was mortgaged.
@V2l2kyV-eqm yep
Quote from the article:
King said K-Mart counsel Catherine O’Neil “represented to you that if we try this case to a verdict and relator gets a verdict, that number will put K-Mart in bankruptcy – not just K-Mart, but K-Mart and Sears, its parent company.”
That is interesting. A judgement was found against Sears. Sears couldn't afford to pay the judgement; so they sold a property.. but If I understand correctly that did not provide sufficient funds to fully pay the judgement; so they are obligated to future payment(s) dated a year away. Do I have that right?