for trial on multiple occasions without a corroborated, justifiable excuse.
Footnote 4:These are the Court's
findings of fact after trial, based on the credible evidence presented. Transcripts are cited
by date. Defendants' witnesses were generally more credible than Plaintiff, who often had
difficulty with specific or independent recollection of timelines and was frequently
evasive, argumentative, or disassembling (see e.g. 5/7 907:16, 936:7-13, 944:18,
955:2-3). This conclusion is not related to Plaintiff's hearing difficulties, which were
addressed with the use of a hearing/transcription aid. To the extent that Plaintiff also
missed multiple trial appearances based on claimed medical necessity, Plaintiff never
credibly corroborated these claims, or any other incapacity which might have affected her
testimony.
Footnote 5:The Court admitted the
Amended Lease over Plaintiff's objection at trial. To the extent that Plaintiff later
reiterated that the Amended Lease is inoperative because the Board did not follow proper
amendment protocols, (Pl Post-Trial Memo of Law 22-24), the Court adheres to
its original determination of admissibility. Both the Lease and Amended Lease contained
a provision permitting amendment upon approval of Lessees owning at least 75% of
shares, with such changes to be binding on all lessees absent certain exceptions not
relevant (or argued) here (Lease, Amended Lease ¶ 6). Angrist credibly
testified that multiple shareholder meetings were held, eventually culminating in
adoption of the Amended Lease in April 2010 (5/16 1369-1379, Defs Exh
12).
Plaintiff failed to rebut Defendants' evidence on this point. Plaintiff did
not, either during or after trial, point to any provision of the Lease or By-Laws which