MJ Management’s Counterclaim

On Friday, March 17th, 2023, the plaintiffs’ lawyers Mr. Andersson and Mr. Davis requested Judge Freeman dismiss MJ Management’s counterclaim against them for recovery of unpaid fees for Homestead. Judge Freeman denied their motion.

Mr. Davis then moved the Court (the judge) to rule that MJ Management was the “real party in interest” if his motion was denied. 

What this means: For 3 years, there has been an ongoing argument about MJ Management’s authority to collect fees, record amendments, sign documents, etc.
In Sept. 2020, MJ’s attorney Philip Buri quoted the Management & Lease Agreement to Mr. Davis: “18 Paradise delegated its authority to act as declarant to MJ Management.”

A few months later, Nov. 2020, 18 Paradise stated, “18 Paradise delegated all rights and duties to maintain the common areas to MJ.” 

These confirmations continued in 2021, making it clear the parties involved understood 18 Paradise had an “agency relationship” with MJ Management, meaning MJ (the agent) had legal permission to act on 18 Paradise’s (the principal) behalf. In other words, despite MJ Management being authorized to collect fees, plaintiffs’ lawyers have continued to claim they did not have that right for 3 years, including at this most recent hearing. 

After Mr. Davis’ motion was denied, Mr. Andersson asked the Court to “stay its Order” (temporarily stop an action or legal proceeding) in awarding fees to MJ’s attorney, Mr. Buri. The Court declined Mr. Andersson’s request, ordering the plaintiffs to pay fees to Mr. Buri who was to hold the funds for one week.

Brief history:
May 29, 2020: Lawsuit filed against 18 Paradise and MJ Management by plaintiffs’ lawyers, David Andersson and Matthew Davis
July, 15, 2022: MJ Management dismissed by plaintiffs’ lawyers as part of their 3rd Amended Complaint. 
Jan. 11, 2023: MJ Management added back into lawsuit by plaintiffs’ lawyers in their 5th Amended Complaint