Holiday Inns, Inc. v. Trump

Claims supported by this source

1. factdocumented

   The partners agreed that jointly funded parking property would serve their casino venture.

   Findings 14-43 and conclusions concerning partnership land and name use

   Atlantic City parking partnership dispute: Promised · Promised

2. factdocumented

   Trump representatives asserted sole ownership while the partners disputed documentation and development of the parking site.

   Findings 14-43 and conclusions concerning partnership land and name use

   Atlantic City parking partnership dispute: The record · The record

3. factdocumented

   Donald Trump was the named defendant and principal of the casino partnership.

   Findings 14-43 and conclusions concerning partnership land and name use

   Atlantic City parking partnership dispute: The record · The record

4. analysisdocumented

   The decision documents a conflict between personal title claims and partnership expectations; it also records that Trump's counsel disclaimed an intent to convey or encumber the property.

   Findings 14-43 and conclusions concerning partnership land and name use

   Atlantic City parking partnership dispute: Audit finding · Cited analysis

5. factdocumented

   The court rejected parts of the plaintiffs' requested relief, making the outcome mixed rather than a one-sided liability finding.

   Findings 14-43 and conclusions concerning partnership land and name use

   Atlantic City parking partnership dispute: Evidentiary limit · Evidentiary limit

6. factdocumented

   The court recognized the partnership context but credited counsel's assurance that Trump did not intend to convey or encumber the land.

   Findings 14-43 and conclusions concerning partnership land and name use

   Atlantic City parking partnership dispute: Outcome · Outcome