IBJNews

Basketball legend Robertson target of bank’s lawsuit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Basketball legend Oscar Robertson’s financial woes have extended to his hometown of Indianapolis, where he is attempting to convince a Marion Superior Court judge that he isn’t responsible for a $203,000 bank loan.

Robertson’s money troubles in Ohio, where he played collegiately at the University of Cincinnati from 1957 to 1960 and professionally for the Cincinnati Royals in the 1960s, have received media attention in recent weeks.

He faces foreclosure on his chemical company Orchem Corp.’s headquarters in Fairfield, Ohio, for nearly $200,000 in back property taxes and interest. Robertson and his wife also personally owe more than $2.4 million to two banks for loans on the Fairfield building.

In the meantime, M&I Bank for more than three years has been attempting to collect on the $203,000 it loaned Robertson and another of his companies, Tyffany Real Estate and Management Inc. of Jasper in southern Indiana.

A hearing is set for Oct. 1 on M&I’s request to have Judge Heather Welch award it a judgment without a trial.

M&I’s four-page complaint filed in January 2009 says Robertson defaulted on the loan he received about a year earlier. The loan was to finance preliminary work on a senior housing facility planned at the old high school in Jasper.

But Robertson contends he isn’t responsible for the loan because the bank fraudulently induced him into signing a guaranty in spite of his assertions that he didn’t have the finances to back the note.

Robertson, 73, claims a bank employee told him he shouldn’t worry because the money loaned under the note would be “rolled into” the permanent financing of the project, which would be secured by the building itself.

“Mr. Robertson has designated evidence that the bank, by deed and conduct, induced him to sign the guaranty it now seeks to enforce, the same guaranty bank officials told Mr. Robertson to not worry about,” lawyers for Robertson argued in an August court document.

A longtime friend and business partner of Robertson’s, Indianapolis entrepreneur Joseph Wolfla, is not named in the suit, but gave a deposition supporting Robertson. Wolfla last year helped reintroduce the Choc-Ola chocolate beverage to store shelves after a 10-year hiatus.

Robertson starred at Crispus Attucks High School in Indianapolis, leading the team to a 31-1 record in 1955 and the first state championship for any all-black school in the nation. The following year the team finished a perfect 31–0 and won a second straight state title.

He led a group of college players to an Olympic gold medal in 1960 and went on to a Hall of Fame career in the National Basketball Association with the Royals and the Milwaukee Bucks. Many basketball experts consider him to be the greatest all-around player in history.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Big O
    Big O, I wish you and yours the very best. Having been there before; I can only say, have a GREAT Lawyer.I spoke to you; on the phone, many years ago, when I lived in Denver and you were on a Q & A, from a local Sports Radio Program.I told you then; You are of the Best Athlete's I ever had the great fortune to watch and its still TRUE, today.Best of luck to You and Your Family. God Bless You and Yours. Bill Snyder.
  • Note to Mark
    Millions of people sign bank loan documents everyday, and 99.9% of those people have no clue regarding the committal agreements they are signing. I tell anyone who will listen to hire a lawyer to read all bank loan documents before they sign on the dotted line. I could not imagine counting on a real estate sales person, a loan officer, a title clerk, or anyone else when signing a multimillion dollar property loan agreement. I am guessing that Mr. Robertson is going to lose this one, not because he was duped, but because he should have hired an attorney before it ever started.
  • Yeah right!
    So we're supposed to believe that the bank is verbally induced him??? Come on, Big O- we know you didn't fall for that! What evidence do you have of this fraudulent inducing? Did you tape the conversation? Everyone knows verbal agreements don't hold up, especially in court and when you're dealing with a bank. Robertson should have known to read the guaranty loan or have his attorney read it. I bet it says absolutely nothing in writing about any money being "rolled into" permanent financing. HA! What happened to the senior facility? Did he spend the money anyway? Sounds suspicious to me. Guess we'll have to wait and see what happens at the hearing on 10/1.
  • Oscar
    Mark, likely a good thing you are not the judge, as he/she has responsibility for reviewing/evaluating all the facts before a decision is rendered. Easy to condemn based on limited information.
  • Not responsible????
    "But Robertson contends he isn’t responsible for the loan because the bank fraudulently induced him into signing a guaranty in spite of his assertions that he didn’t have the finances to back the note." You signed it, you're responsible.

    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