INDEPENDENT LOCAL NEWSNewport News, Virginia
Back to the record

Document text · Page 13 of 20

Seaview: FourLeaf’s adequate-protection memorandum, ECF 18-20

Text from the approved public copy. Page numbers follow the PDF sequence.

Open Source Document

Document page

Page options

This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.

13 8737319.1 “the Property was heavily marketed”, the offer “was the highest and best offer received for the Property”, that the Sale Agreement was “negotiated at arm’s length”, that the Sale Agreement was “proposed in good faith”, that the “purchase price is fair and reasonable”, that “the price was reached after an exhaustive marketing process”, and that “[t]he sale of the Property as contemplated by the Sale Agreement, is in the best interest of Seaview, the Lender, and the Property”. Mr. Goldwasser knew, or should have known, of the entry of the Order Approving Sale, because the Order Approving Sale was entered on December 3, 2025, with Debtor filing its bankruptcy petition on December 15, 2025, and filing the Goldwasser Declaration on December 18, 2025, some two weeks after the entry of the Order Approving Sale. Rather, the Goldwasser Declaration reveals Debtor’s improper intent of circumventing or voiding the Order Approving Sale wherein Debtor’s stated, “primary objective in this case is to implement a transparent, court-supervised sale process that exposes the Property to the market on a nationwide basis through the retention of an independent national commercial real estate brokerage firm, with the goal of achieving the highest and best value.” See the Goldwasser Declaration at paragraph 50. In short, Debtor and Mr. Goldwasser seek to unwind the Order Approving Sale in a quixotic pursuit of a higher purchase price. After having slept on its rights during the process of first securing the Property and then its sale, Debtor now conducts a legal ambush outside of Virginia by way of its bankruptcy petition, in an ill-fated effort to return the Property to Debtor and unravel the Order Approving Sale. Such conduct should be rejected with FourLeaf and the Receiver excused from the provisions of 11 U.S.C. §543(a) and (b). Case 25-23251-MEH Doc 18-20 Filed 12/22/25 Entered 12/22/25 20:08:18 Desc Memorandum of Law Page 13 of 20 ANN public copy | complete ECF 18-20 | combined source PDF 468/478
Jump to an indexed page (20 of 20)

Report a privacy or text-extraction issue through Contact & Corrections.