Judge sets aside $3.9 million verdict

City of Alachua & Heritage Oaks may face off in new trial

GAINESVILLE – A staggering $3.9 million verdict against the City of Alachua awarded by a jury following a two-week trial in August 2012 has been set aside according to a court order signed last week. The shocking award came as a result of a case filed in 2009 by Heritage Oaks – TND, LTD., in which numerous charges leveled against the City of Alachua as to its dealings with the developer of the commercial and residential development adjacent to Santa Fe High School on U.S. Highway 441.

Since that verdict was handed down by the jury last year, thousands of post-trial documents have been filed in the case, including four motions by the City of Alachua. On Friday, April 12, Circuit Court Judge Victor Huslander denied two of the motions sought by the City, but granted one in which the City moved for a new trial on the basis of improper jury instructions and an improper verdict form.

Due to interruptions in preparing the jury instructions and verdict form, the jury was sent back with inadequate information on which to base a decision.

Huslander wrote, “The end result was that a breach of contract claim by the Plaintiff [Heritage Oaks] went to the jury without a legally adequate instruction as to what actions on the part of the Defendant [City of Alachua] could have constituted a breach of contract.”

“Such an error is not harmless, and thus, a new trial is necessary.” He added.

Still, another pending motion before the court may yet trump the direction for a new trial. In addition to agreeing that the jury instructions and verdict form were flawed, Huslander partially granted a motion in which the City sought to have the court reconsider three key legal issues that had been raised earlier in case.

The judge said the court would reconsider whether or not a subdivider’s agreement is a regulatory document on which the basis for a breach of contract action cannot be formed. Huslander said he would also reconsider whether or not the City’s 1993 Land Development Regulations can be incorporated into the subdivider’s agreement.

Perhaps even more crucial to the case, the judge said he would reconsider whether or not before filing the lawsuit, Heritage Oaks was required to exhaust all administrative remedies, such as appealing its concerns to the City Commission of the City of Alachua.

City officials were tight-lipped about the order, citing the ongoing litigation. Attorney David Theriaque, who is now representing the City’s interests in the case said, “The city is very pleased with the order and appreciative of the judge setting aside the verdict.”

The basis of the lawsuit rests on allegations by Heritage Oaks that the City of Alachua breached a contract and interfered with the development. It reportedly sought damages for losses of profit, future sales, loss of appraised property values and expenses it claims the City forced them to incur.

On five counts upon which the jury was ultimately sent back to deliberate, they found the City guilty of all of them and awarded the vast majority of the financial damages sought by Heritage Oaks.

In the case, Heritage Oaks claimed, “The difference in the way the City treated Heritage [Oaks] as compared to other similarly situated developers, was done in order to intentionally discriminate against Heritage [Oaks].”

Other accusations are that the City “inordinately burdened” the developer and “effectively precluded” them from being able to market its property.

As part of his order issued Friday, the judge has directed both sides to schedule a conference with the court to address the status of the case.

#     #     #

Email editor@

alachuatoday.com