IBJNews

Constantino's and City Market reach settlement

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis City Market and anchor tenant Constantino's Market Place have agreed to an amicable divorce.

On Thursday, the two sides inked a settlement agreement in their dispute over $27,000 in unpaid rent. Constantino’s last day of operations in the market will be Dec. 24. The small business must remove its stand, equipment and belongings by Jan. 8.

“Both parties will part as friends,” said Constantino’s attorney Cliff Rubenstein, of Maurer Rifkin and Hill PC. “Constantino’s hopes the City Market is hugely successful in the future.”

Under the agreement, Indianapolis City Market Corp. will release Constantino’s from its obligation to pay its overdue rent. Riley Bennett and Egloff LLP partner Bryce Bennett, who represents the market, said there’s been “a lot of interest” from other potential tenants who could take over Constantino’s space. But no decision has been made on what will replace the stand, which sold fresh meats, cheese and produce.

“Litigation is an emotional as well as a financial drain,” Bennett said. “It’s just better at this point to agree to resolve it this way than to continue.”

Constantino’s ties to the City Market date back to 1911. Its owners, the Mascari family, closed their stand in 1996, but reopened it two years ago at the urging of market officials, who then expected a $2.7 million renovation of the main hall to bring back crowds. The Mascaris invested between $250,000 and $300,000 to build their 1,217-square-foot stand and install its refrigerated display cases.

In a Nov. 14 story, IBJ reported the 123-year-old City Market—which is now half-full, with only 25 tenants—had begun playing hardball with businesses in arrears, securing permission for Constantino’s eviction from Marion Superior Court Judge David Shaheed.

Constantino’s stopped paying rent 13 months ago, believing the terms of  its lease had been violated. After a hiatus, Constantino’s made partial payments in recent months. The business had argued it held exclusive rights to sell fresh fruit, vegetables and gift baskets in the City Market, and that the popular farmers’ market and several other stands violated its deal.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT