Would you steal something on a technicality?
 

https://richmondbizsense.com/2025/05/08/inc-or-llc-the-question-sparked-a-lawsuit-between-current-and-former-owners-of-longtime-petersburg-diner/

I read this and am so made, I feel like I'm the one getting screwed.

Someone needs to burn down the Yeargin's home. What dirtbags.

Well if they can’t sell them a non-existing restaurant then they don’t own it and they should vacate it.

Super weird that they were paying and then stopped, and when asked why they stopped, they said it was due to the technicality.

I shoplifted a roll of lifesavers when I was about 4, not understanding you had to pay for things. My parents drove back to the grocery store and made me talk to the store manager and apologize for stealing. One of the best early life lessons I received. It is amazing how much common sense is lost in our legal system.

Non legal contract- you can't have a contract that gives you something for nothing. Also, it's a clerical error- not the spirit of the deal.

Unless you're in govt and getting kickbacks.

rjp

Social media is made for these kinds of instances. Yelp, for instance.

http://www.yelp.com/biz/dixie-restaurant-petersburg-2

"This restaurant USED to be great, until the Yeargin family stole it from the former owners. The place has gone downhill and now there is no reason to support this place. I urge anyone considering this restaurant to read the May 8, 2025 article on Richmond Bizsense."

Same, I think I was 4.

I suspect these people are sleeping fine at night thinking "it's not illegal, so we're good."

Not only is that going nowhere but they're never going to have a local eat there again. Creeps.

Yes, that is so over-the-top bad faith behavior that it will have repercussions far beyond the legal ones.
The fact that they started paying seems to me to prove they understood the contract the way it was intended. I don't see how they come out on top on this.

Made me smile.

I was five or six, shopping at the grocery store with my Mom. At check out, the Bazooka gum spoke to me, so I decided to help liberate one from the store...gratis.

My mistake was deciding to pop half a Bazooka in my maw on the way home...act like you've stolen before FTLOG.

Like you, u-turns and a store manager were in my immediate future. I can still feel the sense of dread...

I watched my older sister do that, I didn't need to learn that for myself.

Facebook
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1746729258.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1746729258.jpg

Google Reviews
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1746729376.jpg

Yelp
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1746729439.jpg

I think the new owners are screwed, even if they paid the old owners in full with a bonus payment.

I know they say there is no such thing as bad advertising, but I don't believe it.
I don't think they are going to be able to generate 52k a year to pay the sellers after something like this.

Little more to this story.

PO can’t sell something they did not own.

I know they say there is no such thing as bad advertising, but I don't believe it.
I don't think they are going to be able to generate 52k a year to pay the sellers after something like this.

I'd carry a sign and warn all the rest that don't know too!

$ue me :D

Lower than scum they are ... yep!

The Yeargins are going to lose their case and are destined for bankruptcy

Yes Patrick, because the current POTUS is a demented madman bent on the destruction of the republic.

Wait, that was the last one.

Switch to decaf and stop watching "the news"

20 years ago I went to Lowe’s and filled my cart with $900 worth of laminate flooring. Went to pay and the cashier said the total was $49 and change. I said are you sure because that is nowhere close to being correct. She then got offended and then got nasty and insisted that I was wrong and she was right so so I paid the $49 and left with it. I admit it was her nasty attitude towards me that made me not find a manager or another cashier and not my unwillingness to pay what I expected to pay. All these years later I still wonder about my decision. I guess I did steal on a technicality sort of

Would I do what the people in the article did? Never.

I read tonight in one of the comments that the new owners are putting money in escrow, so there may be more to the story.

Well, I wouldnt download a car ...

I'm admittedly not very smart. Why are they doing this?

To avoid the claim that they are avoiding payment. I did a one-year tax withholding during the Vietnam War and put the tax money in escrow. Our lawyer said it was to prove you weren't keeping the money for yourself, you just weren't giving it to the other guy on principle. I'm sure there is a more elegant way to explain it in legalese, but that was the gist of it.

Thank you!

^Bingo.
The deal with any restaurant biz is that its very hard-margins around 5%. To do that you have to be very good and at it a very long time and not have economic uncertainty. I think these folks are "paying themselves" a take home and at the end of the month they don't have 1k to fund this.
Whatever. Mutual mistake voids the contract, and you're left with what lawyers call equitable remedies, in this case "unjust enrichment", which the buyers certainly have been. Whether they're forced to pay 1k a month is open to question, but the most likely outcome.
A court might well find that the distinction between llc and inc is meaningless and reform the contract, which is what these douchebags deserve.

One of the great benefits of aging is that I can honestly say I cannot recall ever stealing anything.
What was the question again?

Plaintiff's attorney; "And when did you make your first payment to that escrow account?"

Defendant; "May 8th 2025"

Plaintiff's attorney; "Isn't that the same day that the newspaper article was published?"

Defendant's attorney; "Objection, Your Honor!!"

Judge; "Overruled. You may answer the question."

Well… weekly payments of 1k. They completed 11 payments totaling 13k on a restaurant they did not purchase… If I was the buyer, i would feel scammed…. If i was the seller, i would have inadvertently scammed someone, then essentially ruined any future profitability…

Huh? The bought the goodwill of an ongoing business, the equipment, everything that was the "restaurant" but the real estate, and the lease for that was assigned.

I'm at a loss as to your thought process, and I was a litigator for over 30 years.

If i bought a house for 123 pine ln and the paperwork was for 123 pine st., i would feel scammed…


Goodwill would only go so far at this point.

Everyone signed the same contract.

Caveat emptor.

Its a simple mistake, and pretty common. I'm in a boat partnership with a "partnership agreement" and a Delaware LLC designation that is mistakenly registered in Delaware as a corp b/c someone checked the wrong box when filing what is clearly the partnership. I don't own part of the boat? Think not.

By goodwill I meant it in the business asset sense, its the value of the ongoing name and the business reputation. It has an asset value, which the buyers acquired.

Hard to follow your thought process here. If there was a house at 123 Pine on which both you and the seller agreed to a sale, and the paperwork was for a house on 123 Pine St that neither of you agree to a sale on, why would you feel scammed?

The seller sold something they did not own, let alone even existed.

Clerical error. IMO without malice.

Now I'm really confused. 123 Pine St. vs 123 Pine Ln.?

I guess the simple solution at this stage is for the new owners to take over the Dixie Restaurant, Inc (the one across town?) and the previous owners of the Dixie Restaurant LLC will have to go back and work the restaurant again until they find a new buyer.

I agree. Hence the whole escrow thing.

Having social media trend the business as stolen while both parties are in the wrong has yet to be seen if it’s leading to a negative reputation and goodwill of the business. If the business fails due to this error, who has to be made whole?…

In that case, the buyer took possession of something that they didn't buy.

Red, I don't disagree if its a true escrow-ie with a 3rd party intermediary. If what it means is "we have another account for this at our bank" then no.

My guess is the new owners will end up paying.

I won't go into all the details of this mess.

When I sold my parents house after their passing the closing went fine. Six months later it was discovered that the survey from 1969 was wrong. The closing company knew the survey was incorrect (per the gentleman that shot the closing survey). Basically, the new owners bought some of Euclid Steet.

I was required to pay for a new survey to correct the problem. I was not a happy camper.