motion picture theater deed restrictions

[Jack Evans]

If a motion picture theater in Michigan has a deed resticrtion on it stating that it may not be used for a period of 20 years as a motion picture theater and name may not be used. How can this be removed. Background- The theatre is a historical landmark, the only theatre in the city. It was operated until late 1997 when it was restricted and closed. In its last operating year the theater was sold to another theater operator who gave up on the theater, restricted it and closed it. There was a pay off to a new theater in the next town to shut down the old theater. The last owner never had any intention in operating the theater, only to improve their relations with the new theater, this due to other operations in other areas. The theater in question was always the preferred theater of choice and still would be today. Because of the last owners intentions can this theater be reopened? Can the deed restrictions be removed or at least reduced in time? Can the city overrule and remove such restrictions? The pay off to the newer theater is not recorded anywhere but did take place. What actions do I have and how should I persue this?

Thank you

 

[HomeGuru]

What is your relationship to this issue (are you a buttered popcorn vendor) and what evidence do you have to substantiate the payoff?

 

[Jack Evans]

I am a resident of the town in question that would like to see the theater reopen. I do not like the one we have now as most also feel and would like to make a go at the closed theater. I know of the pay off thru a reliable source in the business. It would be very hard to prove however since the parties involved do such deals often and never like the details to be known to the public. My main question is how can you get a deed restriction of this nature removed if it could be proven that reopening the business would be of benefit to the city, people and competitive nature of the business? Can city government remove it? A judge? Or can it only be removed by the party who placed it there. Does it matter if the building is a historical building in any way?

 

[HomeGuru]

This would be a very hard case to prevail on unless the guy that took the money becomes the prime witness. Then his testimony is the smokin gun that can pop a lot of popcorn. This would be a criminal case and not a real estate one.