IBJNews

  • Home

Court affirms Murat Centre renaming decision

IBJ Staff
August 16, 2011
Keywords
Advertising, Appeal, Arts & Entertainment, etc., Events, Judgments, Law, Lawsuits, Legal Issues, Media & Marketing, Murat Centre, Music, Performing Arts, Theater, Venues
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A state appellate court has affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a naming-rights lawsuit brought by The Murat Temple Association against California-based event promoter Live Nation and Evansville-based Old National Bank.

The decision from the Indiana Court of Appeals, made public Tuesday morning, stems from a March 26 lawsuit brought by MTA. It attempted to block a three-year deal between the bank and Live Nation to rename the historic building the “Old National Centre.”

Marion Superior Court Judge John Hanley dismissed the suit in August, and MTA appealed.

“The plain language of the lease grants Live Nation the authority to sell naming rights to the leased premises and to post appropriate signs and advertising,” Senior Judge William Garrard wrote. “We conclude that there are no possible set of facts upon which MTA can recover against Live Nation for breach of contract.”

Live Nation operates the 2,500-seat Murat Theatre, Egyptian room and other rooms within the building at 502 N. New Jersey St. under a long-term lease with MTA.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Forever Murat
    JeanineAugust 17, 2011 7:59 AM
    No matter what anyone puts out on the marquee, the building will forever be the Murat to the residents of Indianapolis.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • Up front or not worth much
    rickAugust 16, 2011 1:20 PM
    It appears that if the Murat people wanted to avoid this they should have had a clause preventing it in their agreement with the promoter. To most of the public, this venue will remain "The Murat" anyway. The only time these naming deals are really valuable is when they are done up-front, ala Conseco Fieldhouse, which is often referred to as just "Conseco".
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

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.

ADVANCED SEARCH
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. RKW's comments read like a modern "Chicken Little". As a Raintree resident for many years, "Yes, I'm ready for this." Matter of fact, I welcome The Farm because it's a development that compliments our town, brings new and desirable shopping & dining closer (specialty grocer, upscale shops, micro brew pub, etc), offers upscale condos for empty nesters who want to stay in Zionsville, is being planned and constructed by local, well-reputed firms and, of course, provides desirable non property tax benefits. We all knew the Pittman's were going to develop their property sooner than later. That one of the Pittman's will continue to live on the property helps assure The Farm will be everything promised. This also sets a standard for other developers as to the quality of future developments - which should keep an ugly Walmart at bay for decades. As we've no meglomaniac mayor, I seriously doubt Zionsville would ever aspire to over-priced statues or subsidized retail rents. And we already have a very nice public theater, the Zionsville Performing Arts Center, that meets our cultural needs quite nicely.

  2. Do we add (or subtract) these from the bounty we recieve from RTWFL, Daylight Savings Time, corporate tax giveaways, and the crack job IEDC is doing?? Or is Mike going to blame these on Mitch?

  3. Who makes Tater Tots? They would be a good sponsor, because $3 Million for the alleged "Greatest Spectacle In Racing" is taters. Tiny, tiny taters. But at least they are making up something of the losses accumulated over the years in this dying sport. Buttock in seat is certainly not doing it, nor eyeball on TV, as evidenced by the lack of both.

  4. We loved lakehouse and think the Arbor Village would be a great location. It is less than 2 miles from over 1000 rooftops in the 225,000 to over 1 million range. Many people could use the great fishers trail system to bike or walk there. Just an idea Scotty -- but maybe something closer to 3 Wiseman would good. The only microbrew in area is Ram (boring)

  5. True, it's an ESPN production, but ESPN is just another name for ABC Sports, or what used to be ABC Sports since ABC Sports no longer exists as a name. ESPN=ABC Sports= ESPN. ESPN is, according to Forbes "the world's most valuable media property" worth $40 billion. Despite that, they fired 400 people this week.

ADVERTISEMENT