Finding common ground
By Donna Barker
-
dbarker@bcrnews.com
PRINCETON — Church Women United, owners of The Closet resale shop, lost its battle to maintain The Closet's side gate and fence.
Associate Circuit Judge C.J. Hollerich made his ruling Tuesday afternoon following a bench trial that began Monday morning.
The plaintiffs, Princeton GM LLC, had sought a court injunction to remove an access-restricting gate and fence running through The Closet's back easement property to the neighboring old Walmart building owned by Princeton GM.
The plaintiffs had also asked the court for an injunction allowing Princeton GM to pave a road to the back of The Closet property. However, the judge said that request was not under the court's jurisdiction.
After Tuesday's ruling, CWU spokesperson Mary Susan Webster said she was disappointed with the judge's decision.
"We had no idea which way it would go. We thought we had good arguments why the court should rule in our favor," Webster said. "Though we are disappointed with the judge's decision, we are determined to be optimistic about the outcome."
Webster said she and The Closet board are looking at this time as a new opportunity for The Closet.
"We feel that God has abundantly provided for us for the last 40 years, and we have faith that God is leading us now," Webster said. "When one door is closed, God opens other doors to us. We are Church Women United, and we are still united in the belief that we can make this a positive experience for The Closet and continue our mission of serving the needs of
our community."
Also after Tuesday's court hearing, Bob Ricca, property manager for Princeton GM, expressed his pleasure at the judge's decision and how it impacts the Princeton GM.
"This will allow us to continue marketing the Princeton Shopping Center area for the better of Princeton and the entire area," Ricca said.
The next court hearing is set for July 17 for a final review and signing of the injunction order. Until that time, The Closet's gate and fence is expected to remain in place.
In making his ruling, Hollerich said he realized there was no way to make both parties happy, nor was that even a consideration. His responsibility was to determine what the law says on the matter.
In his closing arguments on Tuesday morning, plaintiff attorney James Sullivan said The Closet easement was part of a "common area," as defined by an easements, covenants and restrictions agreement reached by property owners in the 1980s. The easement access was needed in order to market the former Walmart building, located just north of The Closet, by allowing for delivery truck/loading dock access.
On behalf of The Closet and CWU, attorney Tom McClintock said the resale shop needs its gate and fencing to deter unwanted drop-offs in back of the store. The easements, covenants and restrictions agreement allows for a "reasonable" use of gates and fences if needed, McClintock said.
After reviewing the evidence presented by both parties, Hollerich said The Closet easement property does meet the "common area" definition, and the plaintiffs did have a right to use the property for deliveries to the old Walmart building. The Closet's gate and fence did provide an unreasonable interference with access to the back of the buildings and therefore to the development of that shopping center area. The marketability of the old Walmart property has already been affected by the lack of access, the judge said.
