Pardo Jackson Gainsburg partner Stevan Pardo in Miami, left, and Lombana Hoelle Trial Law founding partners Maria Isabel Hoelle, center, and Hector Lombana, right, in Coral Gables. Courtesy photosPartner in Failed Miami Project Sues to Recoup $59M Investments
A subsidiary of a Hong Kong construction engineering firm is asking Miami-Dade Circuit Court to enforce the sale of a vacant 2.4-acre site and repayment from the proceeds.
July 19, 2019 at 04:30 PM
4 minute read
A would-be developer on a defunct project in Miami's Brickell District claims a partner still owes over $58.8 million for this and another venture that didn't pan out.
The developer wants to recoup its money either through the sale of the Brickell site and a lien foreclosure or the dissolution of the limited liability company that owns the property.
The joint venture project, CCCC Miami World Trade Center, was supposed to be a 3 million-square-foot development on 2.4 acres, rising 59 stories with a mix of condominiums, hotel, office and retail.
Nearly five years after the plan launched, the property bounded by Miami and Southwest First avenues and 14th Street and 14th Terrace remains vacant.
The two sides were locked in lawsuits between each other in Hong Kong. The feud moved to Miami-Dade Circuit Court on June 25 when Champ Prestige International Ltd. sued erstwhile partner China City Construction (International) Co. Ltd. and the site owner, CCCC International USA LLC, seeking to recoup its investment.
Champ Prestige is a British Virgin Islands-based subsidiary of Hong Kong-based Asia Allied Infrastructure Holdings Ltd., a construction engineering company.
The complaint seeks dissolution and foreclosure of an equitable lien.
In 2014, China City Construction, a Hong Kong-based subsidiary of China City Construction Holding Group Co., formed Dingway Investment Ltd. and three companies through which Dingway owned the Brickell site, according to the complaint. CCCC International USA is the last company in the chain making it the titleholder. It bought the site for $74.4 million in 2014.
In 2016, Champ Prestige paid $40.5 million for a 45% interest in Dingway, and China City Construction retained the rest. The agreement covered the potential failure to meet financing and development goals. China City Construction agreed to repay Champ Prestige by buying back the stake or selling the property, according to the complaint.
China City Construction has yet to hold up its end of the bargain, said Miami attorney Stevan Pardo, who filed the complaint. He is a partner at Pardo Jackson Gainsburg.
At one point, Champ Prestige and China City Construction hired a CBRE Inc. professional to appraise the value of the Dingway shares and sell them. The trio communicated via the WeChat cellphone app, but China City Construction stopped responding to Champ Prestige's inquiries, according to the complaint.
CCCC International USA attorney Maria Isabel Hoelle declined comment. She is working on the case with Hector Lombana, founding partners at Lombana Hoelle Trial Law in Coral Gables.
China City Construction and company representative Shan Gao didn't respond to emails seeking comment.
Pardo said the legal threshold to dissolve CCCC International, a Delaware-registered company, has been met. He also filed a lis pendens with the suit.
In addition to the $40.5 million, $18.4 million is allegedly owed on a different transaction in which a Champ Prestige sister company agreed to acquire subsidiaries of China City Construction's parent company with future joint projects in mind, Pardo said.
Listco Group is the parent company of Champ Prestige and Asia Allied. Another subsidiary, AAI Investments Holdings Ltd., in 2015 agreed to buy the shares of CCCC Development Ltd., a subsidiary of China City Construction sister company China Chengjian Investment Ltd. for $84 million, according to the complaint.
“That transaction also unfortunately went south. Our client, the parent of Champ Prestige, paid a substantial portion, about $140M in Hong Kong dollars,” Pardo said.
The two sides walked back on that acquisition and China Chengjian returned some of the money AAI Investments already had put in. AAI Investments sued in Hong Kong for the rest.
In 2017, Listco and China City Construction Group entered a series of agreements, one of which said AAI Investments would be paid back through the Brickell land sale. AAI Investments sought and won enforcement of this agreement in a Hong Kong court. AAI designated Champ Prestige the recipient of this money.
“This was an investment into a series of projects,” Pardo said. “The only important aspect to it is that the sale of the property in Brickell by agreement is proposed to pay off that obligation as well.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Fowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute read
How Much Coverage Do You Really Have? Valuation and Loss Settlement Provisions in Commercial Property Policies
10 minute read
The Importance of 'Speaking Up' Regarding Lease Renewal Deadlines for Commercial Tenants and Landlords
6 minute read
Meet the Attorneys—and Little Known Law—Behind $20M Miami Dispute
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
