Appeals court sides with Fresno over Adventure Church in Tower Theatre purchase

Two years after being sued for its $6.5 million acquisition of the Tower Theatre, the City of Fresno bested a local church challenging the deal.

More than two years after it moved to purchase the historic Tower Theatre, the City of Fresno prevailed on an appeal of a lawsuit filed by another buyer – Adventure Church.

The church, which sued the city after local officials aggressively pursued a purchase after mulling eminent domain, alleged that the city intentionally interfered in a contract with the prior owners of the Tower Theatre.

The backstory: Hefty outcry in 2022 over the church’s prospective purchase of the historic theatre anchoring the Tower District prompted Fresno lawmakers to pursue a $6.5 million purchase of the site, after an eminent domain action was rejected by a judge.

  • Ultimately, Adventure Church sued the City for interfering in its contract with former property owner Laurence Abbate.
  • The church’s lawsuit was struck by Fresno County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Hamilton in mid-2023. Hamilton ruled that the City of Fresno on an anti-SLAPP motion finding that the church’s claim was based on an expired contract and that Adventure Church failed to establish its ability to win on the merits of its case against the City.
  • Adventure Church appealed the motion ruling to the Fresno-based 5th District Court of Appeal.

Inside the ruling: Appellate Justices Charles Poochigian, Thomas DeSantos, and M. Bruce Smith in a July 19 ruling affirmed the 2023 ruling of Hamilton striking the complaint filed by Adventure Church.

  • In the ruling’s syllabus, the trio wrote that the acts of the City of Fresno that Adventure Church alleged were illegal interference in its contract are deemed to be protected activity.
  • Additionally, the jurists noted that the church failed to meet its burden to prove it would prevail on the merits due to a March 31, 2021 expiration date of its contract with Abbate, adding that Abbate never agreed to waive the deadline to complete the transaction.

Read the ruling:

Total
0
Shares
Related Posts