Natl Jockey Club v. Ganassi, et al

Filing 306

MOTION by Defendants Floyd Chip Ganassi, Chip Ganassi Group, L.L.C., for judgment Rule 50(a) motion for judgment as a matter of law (Lewis, Keely)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NAT¡ONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 04 C 3743 Hon. Judge Manning FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and GANASSI GROUP, LLC, a limited liability company, Defendants. FLOYD "CHIP" GASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC'S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW Defendants, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and GANASSI GROUP, LLC (''Defendants'' ) hereby move this Honorable Court to enter Judgment as a Matter of Law in their favor pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 (a) as to Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint. In support of this motion, Defendants state as follows: I . INTRODUCTION Plaintiff asserts only one claim in this matter: Breach of Guaranty against Chip Ganassi. Plaintiff's Complaint, Count I. J1.ç:gment as a matter of law is appropriate where "the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find. for the party on that issue." Fed. R. Civ. Pro. SO(a). In this case, Defendants are entitled to ji.iclgment as a matter of law as to Count I of Plaintiff's Còtnplaint for the following reasons: 1 (1) The uncontroverted evidence establishes that NJC wrongfully terminated the Lease, of which Mr. Ganassi's personal guaranty was part and parcel; (2 ) NJC failed to establish any evidence underlying obligation of Mr. guaranty is due and owing; that the Ganassi's personal (3) The uncontroverted evidence establishes that Mr. Ganassi satisfied his obligations under his personal guaranty; and (4) The uncontroverted evidence establishes that the 8th Amendment. to the Construction Loan Agreement Agreements Act. does not comply with the Illinois Credi t II. THE LAW OF GUARTIES Guaranty contracts are to be strictly construed in favor of the guarantor. 1023, 1028 (2nd Dist. 2008); Lincoln See, e. g., Roth v. Dillavou, 359 IlL. App. 3d Park Fed. Savings and Loan v. Carrane, 192 ¡II.App.3d 188, 191 (1st Dist. 1989); Trust & Sav. Bank v. Stephans, 97 III.App.3d 683, 689 (1st 1981) . The guarantor's undertaking pursuant to the guaranty must be strictly construed, and his or her liability cannot be varied or extended beyond the. precise terms of the guaranty. McLean COl.nty Bank v. Brokaw, 119 IIl.2d 405, 412 (IlL. Sup. Ct. 1988); Emi:ick v. First Nat'l Bank of Jonesboro, 324 III.App.3d 1109, 1114 (5th Dist. 2001); Lincoln Park, 192 III.App.3d at 191. The guarantor is to be accorded the benefit of any doubt may arise fromthé contract language. A.D.E. Inc. v. Louis 2 Joliet Bank and Trust Co., 742 F.2d 395, 396 (7th Cir. 1984) (Judge Posner acknowledging that this is "well-established Illinois law"); McLean County Bank, 119 IIl.2d at 412; Cohen v. tal Illinois Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago, 248 . 3 d 188, 192 ( 1 st Di st. 1993). The law provides that the guarantor of a lease cannot be held liable, without his consent, for any of the obligations of incurred beyond the term of the lease. T. C. T. Bldg. ,. v. Tandy Corp., 323 III.App.3d 114, 118-19 (1st Dist. McHenry Sta te Bank v. Y & A Trucking, Inc. , 117 III.App.3d 629, 633 (2nd Dist. 1983); Kagan v. Gillett, 269 11.1.App. 311 (1st Dist. 1933); Irving Tanning Co. v. Am. Classic, ¡nc., 736 F.Supp. 161, 163 (N.D. IlL. 1990); Essex Int'l, Inc. Clamage, 440 F. 2d 547, 550 (7th Cir. 1971); Cincinna ti Ins. v. Leighton, 403 F.3d 879, 886 (7th Cir. 2005); Brzozowski v. Trust Co., 248 Ill.App.3d 95, 101 (1st Dist. 1993). The law further provides that no liability may be imposed guarantor unless and until the principal debtor has defaul ted on its obligation. Hensler v. Busey Bank, 231 IIl.App.3d 920, 927 (4th Dist. 1992); Peirce v. Conant, 47 294, 305 (1st Dist. 1964); McHenry State Bank v. Y & A Inc., 117 ill.App.3d at 633; Irving Tanning Co. v. Am. Inc., 736 F.Supp. at 163; Essex Int'l, Inc. v. Clamage, 3 440 F.2d at 550; Brzozowski v. Northern Trust Co., 248 III.App.3d at 101. Based on the evidence in this case, which must be construed of the foregoing legal principles, no reasonable jury have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for iff on its claim of breach of guaranty. III. ARGUMNT DEFENDANTS AR ENTITLED TO JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW WHERE NJC WRONGFULY TERMINATED THE LEAE, OF WHICH THE GUARTY WAS PART.A PARCEL. At the direction of Patricia Bidwill, NJC's attorney the Lease between NJC and CMS on October 16, 2002. iff's Exhibit 203 - 10/16/02 Letter from NJC's counsel terminating lease; Trial Transcript of P. Bidwill, p. 1094, Ins. 11..14 (Exhibi t A) . By its very terms, the Guaranty is part and parcel to the The Guaranty states: For value received, and as consideration and inducement for National Jockey Club to enter Chicago Motor Speedway, L. L. C. , of which this Personal Guaranty is a part, the undersigned, into the above and foregoing Lease with Pennsylvania, does hereby personally Mr. Chip Ganassi of Pittsburgh, guaranty repayment of fifty (50%) percent of funds borrowed to make Landlord Improvements as set forth in Section 8 (a) of the above and foregoing Lease, but limited to a maximum personal guaranty of $22,500,000. iff's Exhibit 28 - Lease and Guaranty. 4 Moreover, Charles Bidwill, President of NJC, confirmed in his trial testimony that the Guaranty was part of the Lease. Mr: Bidwill stated: Q. And as the president of National Jockey Club, you understood that the personal guaranty was expressly part of the lease, did you not? A. Yes. Transcript of C. Bidwill, p. 297, Ins. 7 - 14 (Exhibi t B) . *** Q. Chip's Guaranty was given to NJC as part of the lease, right? A. Yes. p. 308, Ins. 8~10 (Exhibit C). the Lease nor the Guaranty attached thereto has any Survival clause or language that would extend the Guaranty provision beyond termination of the Lease. 28 - Lease and Guaranty. See Plaintiff's Mr. Bidwill admits that the does not state that it is continuing: Q. There is no language in Chip's Guaranty, Exhibit 28, that it isa continuing guaranty, is there? Not that I remember, no. Transcript of C. Bidwill, p. 302, Ins. 8-10 (Exhibit D). *** There is no language in Mr. Ganassi' s guaranty that indicates that the guaranty is of a continuing nature, is there? (objection) 5 A. I do not see continuing. Id.at pp. 303-304 , Ins. 25 - 6 (Exhibit E) . *** There's no other - certainly continuing, there is no language that is a continuing guaranty, but there's no other similar words as continuing in his guaranty. A. No. at p. 304, Ins. 16-19 (Exhibit F). r, there has been no evidence submitted that Chip in any way agreed to an extension of the Guaranty beyond termination of the Lease. Notably, the 8th Amendment to the Construction Loan Agreement ("sth Amendment") is of no assistance to Plaintiff. The th Amendment was executed before the Lease was terminated. Thus, termination of the Lease terminated the Guaranty, whether it was amended or not. Furthermorei the sth Amendment amended the Construction Loan Agreement, not the Lease. Ms. Patricia Bidwill is the only NJC witness that has fied regarding the circumstances surrounding NJC's ion of the Lease. Ms. Bidwill admitted that at the time 's termination of the Lease, CMS owed no "rent" - i.e. or interest payments on the Construction Loan. Ms. I testified as follows: Q. Okay. And at the time the lease was terminated, the bank had agreed to the Silverman plan? 6 A. Yes. Q. And the bank had agreed that there would not be a principal payment due for some time to come? I don't was due. come. " remember exactly when our first principal payment They know the definition of "some time to gave us someflexibili ty. I don't Q. All right. It certainly wasn't due on the date of the lease termination? A. Right, correct. Q. And the interest was also paid up on the date of the termination? A. Yes. Transcript of P. Bidwill, pp. 1097-1098, Ins. 23 11 (Exbibi t G). In fact, at the time of termination, the Ganassi side had substantially more rent than the NJC side. Ms. Bidwill . testified: Q. So wouldn't you agree ma' am, that at the time the lease was terminated, that the Ganassi side had paid a considerable, a lot more rent than the NJC side? A. They had paid more rent in terms of principal and interest, yes, at that time, yes. A lot more? A. A lot more, yes. Trial Transcript of P. Bidwill, p. 1097, Ins. 2-8 (Exhibit H). 7 Notably, at the time of termination the bank had not even called the note on the Construction Loan. Ms. Bidwill further testified: Q. At this juncture had Harris Bank called the loan for National Jockey Club? A. No. Transcript of P. Bi.dwill, p. 1083, Ins. 1-3 (Exhibi t I). II similarly testified as follows: Q. Do you recall the bank ever sending National Jockey Club a notice of default? A. No. Transcript of C. Bidwill, p. 428, Ins. 4 - 6 (Exhibit J). is because the principal and interest payments to the bank current. Thus, CMS was not in default on its rent payments time of termination and NJC was not entitled to unilaterally terminate the Lease. When NJC wrongfuiiyte.rminated the Lease , it terminated all of the Lease that were not subj ect to a survival clause. The Guaranty, which was part of the Lease, was not to a survival clause. Accordingly, when the Lease was so too was the Guaranty. Furthermore, the law provides that the guarantor of a , Chip Ganassi, cannot be held liable, without his consent, any of the obligations of the lessee, CMS, incurred beyond term of the lease. See Section II, supra. 8 NJC terminated the lease with the lessee, CMS. There is no evidence in the record that Mr. Ganassi agreed at any time that the Guaranty would extend beyond termination of that Lease. Consèquently, Defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Plaintiff's breach of guaranty claim. B.DEFENDANTS AR ENTI'lLED TO JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW WHERE PLAINTIFF HAS FAILED TO PROVE THAT CMS OWES ANY AMOUNT OF RENT UNER THE LEASE. The law provides that no liability may be imposed upon Chip the Guarantor, unless and until the principal debtor, See Section II, supra. has defaulted on its obligation. y, to collect on the Guaranty, NJC must prove that CMS "rent" under the Lease - i. e. a principal and/or interest on the Construction Loan. The only evidencesubmi tted is that Mr. Ganassi has paid a of over $28 million dollars, $18.5 million of which is debt payment. There is no evidence in the record what, if any, renLis currently due under the Lease, much evidence as to whether the amount is less than, equals the $10.5 million that NJC contends is remaining on Ganassi's Guaranty. As demonstrated above, at the time NJC terminated the , CMS owed no principal or interest payments (rent) under se. Despite that fact, NJC terminated the Lease with only additionàl evidence submitted is that NJC sold 9 th~ track, that NJC continued to operate its horse racing business for four years after it terminated the Lease with CMS, that NJC is now in bankruptcy, and that Mr. Duchossois now owns So what further obligation is there under the Lease, the note? There is simply no evidence in the record shing any further obligation. Ex Parte Kaschak is persuasive authority in this case. Ex PêJrte Kaschak, 681 So. 2d 197 (Sup. Ct. Ala. 1996). In Ex Parte KåSchak, the court held that termination of a commercial lease also terminated the liability of the guarantor for unpaid rent. The court noted that courts will look to the terms of the guaranty agreement to determine if something in the language obligates the gua.rantor beyond the termination of the lease between the principals. Where a guaranty agreement is unconditional, the liabili ty of the guarantor will not exceed the liability of the principal debtor. Id. In order to be entitled to enforce the ob1.igation of the contract of guaranty, the creditor must show that the guaranteed debt or obligation is due. Id. If for any reason is not bound to make payment to the creditor, then the may not hold the guarantor liable. Id. A guarantor is only in the event and to the extent that the principal is Id. A lessor can recover on an unconditional guaranty of lease only by proving a claim against the lessee on the 10 underlying lease agreement. Id.; see also Brywood Ltd. Partners, .P. v. H.T.G., Inc., 866 S.W.2d 903 (Mo. App. 1993). There is no evidence that there was or is any "rent" Currently due and owing by CMS under the Lease for which Mr. Gànàssi could be responsible as guarantor of CMS's obligations. without evidence of an underlying obligation, Mr. Ganassi cannot be required to pay on the Guaranty and is entitled to judgment asá matter of law. C. DEFENDANTS AR ENTI'lLED TO JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW WHERE CHIP GAASSI SATISFIED HIS OBLIGATION UNER THE GUARTY. Pursuant to the express terms of the Guaranty, Mr. Ganassi sponsible for a maximum of $22.5 million. The Guaranty For value received, and as consideration and inducement for National Jockey Club to enter Chicago Motor Speedway, L. L. C. , of which this Personai Guaranty is a part, the undersigned, Mr. into the above and foregoing Lease with Chip Ganassi of Pittsburgh, guaranty repayment of fifty Pennsyl vania, does hereby personally ( 50%) percent of funds borrowed to make Landlord Improvements as set forth in Section 8 (a) of the above and foregoing Lease, but limited to a maximum personal guaranty of $22,500,000. , s Exhibit 28 - Lease and Guaranty. It is undisputed in this case that Mr. Ganassi has paid See $28 million. Defendants' Exhibit 221B - CMS Partner 11 Fundings Through June 30, 2002. Further, Mr. Kras, NJC's Chief Financial Officer, testified as follows: Q. Looking at Exhibit 221B, that is your accounting department's tracking of what Mr. Ganassi had paid into this proj ect, is it not? This is what we credi ted contributions for, yes. Ganassi Group's Q. All right. It's clear that you agree today that the total contribution was 28 million - 28 and a half million dollars? A. Yes. Q. And all of those payments, as far as you were concerned when you made this, legitimate, and there wasn't any about that amount of money, was there? controversy were all A. This was not prepared by me, but I relied on it and I believe it's factual and truthful. Transcript of J. Kras, p. 988, Ins. 8-20 (Exhibit K). There is no evidence that these monies did not originate from the pocket of Chip Ganassi. Mr. Ganassi testified that money, though it may have passed through the Ganassi Group, i ty, originated with and was caused to be paid by him ly. Mr. Ganassi stated: Q. And when money was requested of Group, the money came from its members, correct? A. All the money that came, when Charlie would call money . me and say he, we need money,! sent him And member of CMS? that money came from Group, which Yes. was a It came from wherever I had money. 12 Trial Transcript of C. Ganassi, p. 1165, Ins. 15-21 (Exhibit L). No evidence has been submitted to refute this contention. In fact, NJC's witnesses claim either that Mr. Ganassi paid the .mpney, that they understood Mr. Ganassi and Ganassi Group, LLC and the same, or that they simply did not in fact know of funds being submitted from the Ganassi side. NJC's President, Mr. Bidwill, testified as follows: Q. Sorry. Here' swhat happened. If CMS didn't have enough money, you had a good relationship with Chip Ganassi, did you not? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you would call him from time to time and say: Hey, Chip, we're short; can you send some money? A. Yes, sir. Q. And he did that by and large, didn't he? A. Yes, sir. Transcript of C. Bidwill, pp. 343-344, Ins. 19 2 t M) . *** And so you called Chip Ganassi and asked him for money, did you Aot? I'm sure a request was made to Mr. Ganassi or Ganassi Group, yes. Well, you told us yesterday that you spoke to Chip to get that money, did you not? A. I'm sure I spoke to him. 13 Q. And somebody on behalf of Mr. Ganassi sent that money, didn't they? A. Yes, sir, I believe so. Q. And you as you sit here today don't know the source of that funds, do you? A. No, sir. Q. You don't know the source of any of the funds that Mr. GanaBsi sent in, do you? A. You mean from - I don't know what you mean by that. Q. All right. You don't know out of what accounts the moneys came from. You never saw the check come in? A. No, sir. pp.470-471, Ins. 11 - 4 (Exhibit N) . Mr. Kras, NJC's Chief Financial Officer, testified as follows: Q. Okay. So i~total you'd agree that Chip Ganassi funded $ 18, 750 i 000 of loan payments would you not? I would agree that either Mr. Ganassi or Ganassi Group funded that amount, yes. I'm sorry, what did you say? A. Ei ther Mr. Ganassi or Ganassi Group funded that $18 million, yes. Q. But you know that it was Chip Ganassi, don't you? A. I would believe it's one and the same, but I don't know the nature of all the transactions. Transcript of J. Kras, p. 994, Ins. 2-11 (Exhibit 0). 14 The evidence in this case has established that Mr. Ganassi has paid well more than the maximum $22.5 million required of him under the Guaranty. Consequently, Mr. Ganassi satisfied his Where the evidence establishes obligation under the Guaranty. Mr. Ganassi has satisfied any obligation that he had or has the Guaranty, Plaintiff has failed to establish that Mr. Ganassi breached the Guaranty iff's claim for a necessary element to As such, Defendants breach of guaranty. it led to a j udgfuentas a matter of law . DEFENDANTS AR ENTITLED TO JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW WHERE THE 8TH AMNDMENT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE ILLINOIS CREDIT AGREEMNTS ACT. In this case, NJC sued Chip Ganassi for breach of a gi.aranty that was "part of" the Lease between NJC and CMS. See Plaintiff' s Complaint,~ 33. Mr. Ganassi is premised To the extent NJC's claim against on the 8th Amendment to the Construction Loan Agreement ("8th Amendment"), which Defendants adamantly is improper, the Illinois Credit Agreements Act (" ICAA") s claim. Under the ICAA, a "credit agreement" is defined as "an or commitment by a creditor to lend money or extend or delay or forbear repayment of money not primarily for family or household purposes, and not in connection the issuance of credit cards." 815 ILCS 160/1 (West 2009). requirement or the ICAA provides: 15 (aJ debtor may not maintain an action on or in any way related to a credit agreement unless the credit agreement is in writing, expresses an agreement or commi tment to lend money or extend creditor delay or forbear repayment of money, sets forth the relevant terms and conditions, and is signed and debtor. 160/2 (emphasis added). The "ICAA is a broad by the creditor statute that will be applied the way written, even though the results of that application may times seem harsh." Help at Home, Inc. v. Med. Capital, LLC, .3d 748, 755 (7th cir. 2001) (citations omitted). form of the statute of frauds. Courts consistently held that "(t J he ICAA' s writing requirement is In particular, it Id. s the signatures of both parties; the signature of only one party renders the agreement unenforceable." (citing ution Trust Corp. v. Thompson, 989 F.2d 942, 944 (7th Cir. McAloon v. Northwest Bancorp., Inc., 274 IlL. App. 3d 758 .1995)). guaranty contract Bank One, is one of several documents ituting a credit agreement and cannot be considered Springfield v. Roscetti, 309 3d 1048, 1058 (4th Dist. 2000). For example, in Bank court found a guaranty, together with a note and other consti tuted the comprehensive credit agreement at Id. The court held that the guarantor's defenses and 16 counterclaims violated the ICAA's prohibi tion of oral modifications to credit agreements. Id. at 1059. In this case, NJC's only claim against Chip Ganassi pivots on its contention that the Guarantor's Consent to the 8th Amendment amends Mr. Ganassi' s Guaranty, a position which Defendants have repeatedly argued is untenable for numerous reasons. One reason is that NJC's argument is prohibited as a matter of law where neither NJC nor the bank or its syndicates signed the Guarantor's Consent to the 8th Amendment as required ICAA. the ICAA, NJC is the debtor to the 8th Amendment, is a credit agreement. 815 ILCS 160/1 (West 2009). The expressly prohibits NJC from maintaining actions on or in way related to such a credit agreement unless the credit agreement is signed by the creditor and debtor. 815 ILCS 160/2 (West 2 0 0 9) . The Guarantor's Consent to the 8th Amendment contains only Chip Ganassi' s signature. See Defendants' Exhibit 8th Amendment. Nei ther Harris Bank, nor any of the banks, nor NJC signed the Guarantor's Consent. , the ICAA bars any and all claims in any way related credi t agreement - i. e. the 8th Amendment - because the Harris Bank and syndicates, as well as the debtor, failed to sign the Guarantor's Consent to the 8th Amendment. 17 Consequently, Defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Plaintiff's breach of guaranty claim. WHEREFORE, Defendants, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and GANASSI GROUP, LLC, respectfully request this Honorable Court to enter udgment as a matter of law in their favor and against Plaintiff as to Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint. Respectfully submitted, "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC Defendants, FLOYD One of the By: / s Keely Lewis Wise Attorneys for Decemer 11, 2009 Brian W. Bell, #160431 Kéely Lewis Wise, #6280469 Alfred K. Murray II, #6297264 SWASON, MATIN & BELL, LLP 330 Chicago, North Wabash Avenue - Suite 3300 Illinois 60611 . (312) 321-9100 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT A TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW P Bidwill - cross by Bell 1094 1 Q. Let me restate the questi on. 2 A. I'm sorry. 3 Q. It's not a problem. i'm happy to repeat it. 4 when the negoti ati ons wi th chi p stopped, you then 5 conti nued to combi ne wi th Hawthorn and al so to market the 6 property for sale, which it was eventually sold to Cicero? 7 A. The only thing I would add to that is at that time we also 8 were talking to a buyer for NJC without going into merging with 9 HRC. So there were still more options on the table that we were 10 tryi ng to sort through. 11 Q. 12 A. Q. okay. Yes. But eventua 11 y you termi nated the 1 ease? 13 And you caused your 1 awyers to do that? 14 A. 15 Q. Yes. And would you go to Exhibit No. 204, pl ai nti ff' s 204. Maybe 16 it's 203. sorry. i keep missing by one. 17 Thi sis the 1 etter that Mr. pranger sent termi nati ng the 18 1 ease, is it not? 19 A. Yes, it is. 20 Q. And you woul d have revi ewed that pri or to sendi ng it? 21 A. Yes, yes. 22 Q. And Mr. Pranger was then a lawyer with your present counsel's 23 fi rm? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And thi s 1 ette r sets out the reason for the te rmi nati on? IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT B TO FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 297 1 A. Yes, sir. Q. That's your signature there? 2 3 4 A. Yes, it is. Q. And when you signed it, you signed it as the president of National Jockey Club. 5 6 7 8 A. Yes, I did. Q. And as the president of National Jockey Club, you understood that the personal guaranty was expressly part of the lease, did you not? 9 10 11 12 A. Yes. Q. As a matter of fact, it not only says it's a part of the lease, but it's, in fact, attached to the lease. It's in the 13 14 same document, is it not? Exhibit 28. A. Yes. Q. And when you signed as president of National Jockey Club, what you understood was that if Chicago Motor Speedway, 15 16 17 18 the tenant, was unable to pay the rent, which we've talked about in paragraph 3, that in that instance National Jockey 19 Club could look to Mr. Ganassi for payments up to a maximum of 22-5. 20 21 That's what your understanding was, was it not? 22 23 24 A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. And so the payments that they could look to included principal, it included interest, and related construction charges, related loan charges, right? 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT C TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 308 1 Q. But Chip's guaranty was with CMS and NJC in Exhibit 28, 2 3 4 right? MS. BARAN: Obj ection. Assumes a fact not in evidence, the guaranty being with CMS. 5 6 MR. BELL: I'LL withdraw the question. THE COURT: Okay. It's withdrawn. 7 8 BY MR. BELL: 9 Q. Chip's guaranty was given to NJC as part of the lease, right? A. Yes. Q. But the stock was held by the bank? 10 11 12 13 14 A. Yes. Q. SO it was necessary to document the sale of the stock because the bank didn't have a guaranty with Chip Ganassi, did they? 15 16 17 18 MS. BARAN: Objection. Calls for a legal conclusion and speculation. THE COURT: It doesn't call for a legal conclusion. 19 It's a factual -- if he knows, he knows. If he doesn't, he 20 21 22 can so indicate. THE WITNESS: I don't know that it did or didn't. BY MR. BELL: 23 24 Q. You're not aware, as the president of NJC and the person who has been directing this litigation, that Chip Ganassi had any separate guaranty with the bank, are you? 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT D TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC i S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 302 1 Q. Let's take a look at 166 A, paragraph 1. That says: "This guaranty is a continuing, absolute, and unconditional 2 3 4 guaranty, and shall remain in full force and effect until wri tten notice of its discontinuance shall be actually 5 6 7 8 received by the bank." Right? It says that, does it not? A. Yes, it does. Q. There is no language in Chip's guaranty, Exhibit 28, that it is a continuing guaranty, is there? 9 10 11 A. Not that I remember, no. Q. All right. Nor is there any language that it's an absolute and unconditional guaranty, is there? 12 13 14 A. Just looking again, but -Q. If you could sort of keep them side by side, that would 15 help us. 16 17 A. No, I don't see that. Q. Looking at paragraph 3 of 166, it says: "The liability hereunder shall in no wise be affected or impaired by," and 18 19 bank is hereby authorized to make from time to time, "any sale, pledge, surrender, compromi se, release, extension, 20 21 22 alteration, substitution." There's no such language like that in Chip's guaranty either, is there? 23 24 A. No, there is not. Q. And then if we go on to like paragraph 7, on page 3, on 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT E TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 303 1 Exhibit No. 166, it says: "The undersigned waives any and all defenses~claims and discharges of the borrower or the obligor pertaining to the indebtedness." 2 3 4 There's no paragraph like that in Chip's guaranty either, is there? 5 6 7 8 9 A. No, sir. Q. And then if you go to page 4, I think your lawyer pointed out this notice. It says: "Important notice to guarantors. " Do you see that on page 4? 10 11 12 A. Yes, sir. Q. It says: "You are being asked to guarantee this debt," 13 14 15 et cetera, and: "You may have to pay the full --" there's nothing like that in Chip's guaranty, is there? A. No, sir. Q. Chip's guaranty, unlike this guaranty, was limited to a specific figure, that being 22-5, isn't that true? 16 17 18 A. Yes, sir. Q. And Chip's guaranty was not a 19 continuing guaranty, was 20 21 22 it? MS. BARAN: Objection. Calls for a legal conclusion. THE COURT: Rephrase, Counsel. BY MR. BELL: 23 24 25 Q. There is no language in Mr. Ganassi' s guaranty that C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 304 1 indicates that the guaranty is of a continuing nature, is 2 3 4 there? MS. BARAN: Objection. Still calls for a legal conclusion. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I do not see continuing. BY MR. BELL: 5 6 7 8 9 Q. Nor any other language that would infer that it i S continuing, is there? 10 11 12 13 14 MS. BARAN: Objection. Calls for a legal conclusion. THE COURT: I i m sorry. No other language that what? MR. BELL: Let me withdraw it, your Honor. BY MR. BELL: 15 16 17 18 Q. There i s no other -- certainly continuing, there is no language that is a continuing guaranty, but there i s no other similar words as continuing in his guaranty. 19 A. No. 20 21 22 Q. And you had the benefit of a lawyer on this guaranty and lease, that being Mr. Lalich? A. Yes, sir. Q. And as you mentioned, you were a seasoned businessman at that time? 23 24 25 A. Yes, sir. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT F TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 304 1 indicates that the guaranty is of a continuing nature, is 2 3 4 there? MS. BARAN: Obj ection. Still calls for a legal conclusion. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I do not see continuing. BY MR. BELL: 5 6 7 8 9 Q. Nor any other language that would infer that it's continuing, is there? 10 11 MS. BARAN: Obj ection. Calls for a legal conclusion. THE COURT: I'm sorry. No other language that 12 13 14 what? MR. BELL: Let me withdraw it, your Honor. BY MR. BELL: 15 16 17 18 Q. There's no other -- certainly continuing, there is no language that is a continuing guaranty, but there's no other similar words as continuing in his guaranty. 19 20 21 22 A. No. Q. And you. had the benefit of a lawyer on this guaranty and lease, that being Mr. Lalich? A. Yes, sir. Q. And as you mentioned, you were a seasoned businessman at that time? 23 24 25 A. Yes, sir. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT G TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW P Bidwill - cross by Bell 1097 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. SO woul dn' t you agree, rna' am, that at the ti me the 1 ease was 3 terminated, that the Ganassi side had paid a considerable, a lot 4 more rent than the NJC si de? 5 A. They had paid more rent in terms of principal and interest, 6 yes, at the time, yes. 7 Q. A lot more? 8 A. A lot more, yes. 9 Q. Tens of -- well, more than $10 million more at the time of 10 termi nati on? 11 A. well, thi sis recappi ng debt, ri ght? It's not recappi ng 12 everythi ng that's i nsi de of rent. 13 Q. Ma' am -- 14 A. So you're asking me about rent. I'm sorry. 15 Q. Yes. I'm not asking you about operational. I'm not asking 16 you about anyth i ng othe r than rent. . Fo r the moment, we're rea 11 y 17 talking about principal here. 18 Ganassi had pai d more than $10 mi 11 i on of rent more than 19 NJC had when the 1 ease was termi nated? 20 A. I can answer $10 million more in principal in principal. 21 But rent is a different thing. So yes, the numbers clearly show 22 here that. 23 Q. okay. And at the ti me that 1 ease was te rmi nated, the bank 24 had agreed to the silverman plan? 25 A. Yes. P Bidwill - cross by Bell 1098 1 Q. And the bank had agreed that there would not be a principal 2 payment due for some ti me to come? 3 A. I don't know the defi ni ti on of "some ti me to come." They 4 gave us some fl exi bi 1 i ty . i don't remembe r exactly when ou r 5 fi rst principal payment was due. 6 Q. All right. It certainly wasn't due on the date of the lease 7 termi nati on? 8 A. Right, correct. 9 Q. And the interest was also paid up on the date of the 10 termi nati on? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. okay. Ms. Bidwill, in the letters that we saw this morning, 13 and I'm certainly not going to rehash them, but referring to the 14 letters that you wrote to Mr. Ganassi during that period of time, 15 there was not a si ngl e menti on of a cl ai m that you were 16 threateni ng to make on chi p Ganassi 's guaranty, was there? 17 A. well, he mentioned 18 Q. Ma'am, I think my question was in your -19 A. In my 1 etter, in all the 1 etters that I just wrote to him? 20 Q. No. 21 A. Sorry, sorry. 22 Q. That's okay. 23 In the 1 etters that we revi ewed thi s morni ng, I thi nk 24 there were four or five of them talking about transactions and 25 deals and the way to restructure, there wasn't any comment by you IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT H TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW P Bidwill - cross by Bell 1097 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. SO wouldn't you agree, ma'am, that at the time the lease was 3 terminated, that the Ganassi side had paid a considerable, a lot 4 more rent than the NJC si de? 5 A. They had pai d more rent in terms of pri nci pal and interest, 6 yes, at the time, yes. 7 Q. A lot more? 8 A. A lot more, yes. 9 Q. Tens of -- well, more than $10 million more at the time of 10 termi nati on? 11 A. well, thi sis recappi ng debt, ri ght? It's not recappi ng 12 everything that's inside of rent. 13 Q. Ma'am-- 14 A. So you're asking me about rent. I'm sorry. 15 Q. Yes. i'm not asking you about operational. i'm not asking 16 you about anythi ng othe r than rent. For the moment, we're rea 11 y 17 talking about principal here. 18 Ganassi had pai d more than $10 mi 11 i on of rent more than 19 NJC had when the 1 ease was termi nated? 20 A. I can answer $10 million more in principal in principal. 21 But rent is a di fferent thi ng. So yes, the numbe rs cl earl y show 22 here that. 23 Q. okay. And at the time that lease was terminated, the bank 24 had agreed to the silverman plan? 25 A. Yes. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT I TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW 1083 Bidwill - direct by Baran 1 Q. At this juncture, had Harris Bank called the loan for 2 National Jockey Club? 3 A. No. 4 MS. BARAN: Move to admit Plaintiff's Exhibit 103. 5 MR. BELL: No objection. 6 THE COURT: It will be received. 7 (Plaintiff's Exhibit 103 received in evidence.) 8 MS. BARAN: I could stand here for a couple minutes. 9 No, I'm just kidding. Just kidding. 10 BY MS. BARAN: 11 Q. Did you put any money into National Jockey Club? 12 A. Yes, I did. 13 Q. How much money did you put in? 14 A. Over half a million dollars. 15 Q. Are you one of the subordinated debtors? 16 A. Yes, I am. 17 Q. Why did you put money into National Jockey Club? 18 A. Because, you know, we had a strategy and a plan to try to 19 meet our obligations with the bank. You know, we had a company 20 that was 70 years in business, a lot of employees. So I 21 believed that the strategy that we came up with would allow us 22 to continue paying down this debt, but we could not part of 23 that strategy, in addition to selling the property, it required 24 additional equity. So I asked a lot of different family 25 members to put in that equity so that we would have enough IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT J TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW 428 C. Bidwill - redirect by Baran 1 the third and the eighth amendments, whether National Jockey 2 Club was in default of the construction loan agreement? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Do you recall the bank ever sending National Jockey Club a 5 notice of default? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Rather than be in default, what did National Jockey Club -- 8 MS. BARAN: Strike that. 9 BY MS. BARAN: 10 Q. Did National Jockey Club get waivers of its failures to 11 satisfy the financial covenants? 12 A. Yes, they did. 13 Q. And what in exchange did National Jockey Club give to the 14 bank to excuse or to waive their failure to comply with the 15 financial covenants? 16 A. Well, they increased our EBITDA requirements for the horse 17 racing events. 18 Q. What payments were made after the execution of the third 19 amendment? 20 A. To the bank? 21 Q. Yes. Immediately upon execution, what was required by the 22 bank, the third amendment? 23 A. Third amendment? Five and a half million dollars. 24 Q. And we've talked about what was also required to be paid 25 beyond the $12 million in exchange for the release of the IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT K TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW 988 Kras - cross by Bell 1 Q. Look back all the way to page 2, the second page in. 2 You're looking for the document that's now up on the screen. 3 A. Okay. It's not okay. Yes, I have it. 4 MR. BELL: All right. Would you give us a little 5 wider shot of that, Eric, please? 6 (Brief pause.) 7 BY MR. BELL: 8 Q. Looking at Exhibit No. 221B, that is your accounting 9 department's tracking of what Mr. Ganassi had paid into this 10 project, is it not? 11 A. This is what we credited Ganassi Group's contributions for, 12 yes. 13 Q. All right. It's clear that you agree today that the total 14 contribution was 28 million -- 28 and a half million dollars? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. And all of those payments, as far as you were concerned 17 when you made this, were all legitimate, and there wasn't any 18 controversy about that amount of money, was there? 19 A. This was not prepared by me, but I relied on it and I 20 believe it's factual and truthful. 21 Q. okay. Let's go to 21B, please. That would be, I think, 22 the third from the last, same date, October of 2002 shortly 23 before the lease was terminated. 24 A. October 9th? 25 Q. Yes, sir. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT L TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Ganassi - di rect by Baran 1165 1 BY MS. BARAN: 2 3 a. And the full title of the Race Team is? A. Chip Ganassi Race Teams, Inc. a. Now, you personal 4 5 6 7 1 y have income, correct? A. In those days. a. And Raci ng Teams al so had income in those days? A. Yes. 8 9 a. And when the - - but Group i tsel f di d not have any bank account or any income, correct? 10 11 A. Group di d not have any bank account, or checki ng account, or employees, or anythi ng el se. I thi nk we've sai d that ad nauseum. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 a. Well, I'm hearing it from you, Chip. A. Yes. a. And when money was requested of Group, the money came from its members, correct? A . All the money that came, when Charl i e woul d call me and say hey, we need money, I sent hi m money. 19 a. And that money came from Group, whi ch was a member of CMS? 20 21 A. It came from wherever I had money. Yes. a. Over ti me, Chi p Ganassi Group LLC added new members, 22 23 correct? 24 25 A. Late, 1 ater in the - - yes. a. In 2000 it added your father, Floyd Ganassi? IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT M TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 343 1 wouldn't you think that that would satisfy his guaranty? 2 MS. BARAN: Obj ection. Calls for a legal 3 4 conclusion. THE COURT: It's speculative, too, so I'll sustain 5 6 7 8 the obj ection. MR. BELL: Could I just be heard a second on that, your Honor? I'LL tell you what. I'll go ahead. BY MR. BELL: 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. In any event, Mr. Bidwill, you're not in any position to contest the fact that Chip has paid, you know, close to $23 million in interest and principal in this matter, are you? MS. BARAN: I'm going to obj ect to the form of the question. THE COURT: Overruled. He may answer if he can. If he knows. 15 16 17 18 THE WITNESS: Say it again. BY MR. BELL: 19 20 21 22 Q. Sorry. Here's what happened. If CMS didn't have enough money, you had a good relationship with Chip Ganassi, did you not? A. Yes, sir. Q. And you would call him from time to time and say: Hey, Chip, we're short; can you send some money? 23 24 25 A. Yes, sir. C. Bidwill - cross by Bell 344 1 Q. And he did that by and large, didn't he? 2 3 4 A. Yes, sir. Q. And wouldn't you agree that if Chip Ganassi sent that money at your request, and it included more than 23, almost $24 million of principal and interest, wouldn't you agree as 5 6 president of NJC that that should count against and reduce his guaranty? 7 8 MS. BARAN: Obj ection. Calls for legal conclusion. I'd like to be heard. 9 10 11 12 THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the obj ection. BY MR. BELL: Q. Mr. Bidwill, there is a -- well, I'll come back to that. And I missed something. 13 14 15 Mr. Bidwill, you're familiar with the subj ect of conversion costs? 16 17 A. Yes, sir. Q. Conversion costs are those expenses that are incurred moving the dirt on the track and off the track and things 18 19 like that. Right? 20 21 22 A. Yes, sir. Q. And in this case, when you put that exhibit back together, would you go to Exhibit No. 28. My question will 23 24 be A. I'm sorry. Which exhibit? 25 Q. 28. It's the lease. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT N TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW C Bi dwi 11 - recross 470 lover thi s exhi bi t thi s morni ng? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. And what happened is chi cago -- well, the loan was -- or the 4 bank was unhappy, and they wanted $5 million, right, for 5 pri nci pal? 6 A. That's putting it shortly, yes. We were in default. 7 Q. You were in defaul t, and the bank wanted a $5 mi 11 i on cash 8 payment. And National Jockey club did not have all of that 9 money, di d it? 10 A. No. 11 Q. And so you called chip Ganassi and asked him for money, did 12 you not? 13 A. I'm sure a request was made to Mr. Ganassi or Ganassi Group, 14 yes. 15 Q. well, you told us yesterday that you spoke to chip to get 16 that money, di d you not? 17 A. I'm sure I spoke to him. 18 Q. And somebody on behal f of Mr. Ganassi sent that money, di dn' t 19 they? 20 A. Yes, si r, I believe so. 21 Q. And you as you sit he re today don't know the sou rce of that 22 funds, do you? 23 A. NO, sir. 24 Q. You don't know the sou rce of any of the funds that 25 Mr. Ganassi sent in, do you? C Bi dwi 11 - recross 471 1 A. You mean from -- I don't know what you mean by that. 2 Q . All ri ght. You don't know out of what accounts the moneys 3 came from. You never saw the check come in? 4 A. No, si r. 5 Q. What you we re happy wi th is that chi p kept sendi ng money? 6 MS. BARAN: obj ecti on, argumentati ve . 7 THE COURT: i'll sustain the objection. That was not a 8 questi on ei ther. 9 MR. BELL : All ri ght . 10 BY MR. BELL: 11 Q. In any event, Mr. Ganassi made good on his promise to pay 12 $2,750,000 into that principal payment, did he not? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. And i thi nk thi s morni ng you testi fi ed that you thought that 15 was a loan from Mr. Ganassi? 16 A. Yes, i di d . 17 Q. is that loan reflected anywhere on Exhibit 221? 18 A. i'd have to look at 221, sir. 19 Q. well, let's look at 221. 20 A. where is that? 21 Q. i bel i eve that's defendants'. 22 A. Defendants', ri ght? 23 Q. Do you see Exhibit No. 221? 24 A. Yes, i do. 25 Q. And do you see any loans on that document? IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NATIONAL JOCKEY CLUB, an Illinois corporation, Plaintiff, FLOYD "CHIP" GANASSI and CHIP GANASSI GROUP, L.L.C., a Limi ted liability company, No. 04 C 3743 Judge Manning Magistrate Judge Nolan Defendants. EXHIBIT 0 TO FLOYD "CHIP" GAASSI AN GAASSI GROUP, LLC' S RULE 50 (a) MOTION FOR JUGMNT AS A MATTER OF LAW 994 Kras - cross by Bell 1 A. Based on this document, yes. 2 Q. Okay. So in total you'd agree that Chip Ganassi funded 3 $18,750, 000 of loan payments, would you not? 4 A. I would agree that either Mr. Ganassi or Ganassi Group 5 funded that amount, yes. 6 Q. I'm sorry. What did you say? 7 A. Either Mr. Ganassi or Ganassi Group funded that 8 $18 million, yes. 9 Q. But you know that it was Chip Ganassi, don't you? 10 A. I would believe it's one and the same, but I don't know the 11 nature of all the transactions. 12 Q. Okay. Do you recall giving your deposition? I think you 13 came to my office three times? 14 A. I believe you've said that, yes, and I would concur. 15 Q. And do you recall being asked this question at page 156? 16 MS. BARAN: Of which one? 17 MR. BELL: That would be page -- or that would be 18 Volume 1. 19 MS. BARAN: Volume 1. Which date was that? Oh, 2 a here, I got it. Okay. I'm sorry. The page again? 21 MR. BELL: Page 156. 22 MS. BARAN: Do you have a line number? 23 MR. BELL: Yes, line 12. 24 BY MR. BELL: 25 Q. Do you recall being asked this question by myself:

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?