When you go into a mall area, do you ever stop and consider who actually owns the parking lot? Probably not, because you’re an absolute genius at parking and pretty much laser-focused on getting that perfect space with great distance between cars and super close proximity to the front door. And doesn’t it feel great when you get that space!
Well, moviegoers in Madison, Wisconsin may soon find themselves without any convenient places to park when they head to the movies— if their theater survives at all.
According to a recent lawsuit the company that owns the parking lot closest to the theater, where patrons of the budget multiplex customarily park, has told the owners of the Market Square shopping center the parking lot is being sold and that moviegoers don’t have a right to park there. The company has informed shopping center owner Market Square Associates LLC and Silver Cinemas, which operates the second-run movie theater, that barricades will go up on May 1 to keep movie patrons from using the 151-space parking lot, which is located immediately outside the movie theater’s doors.
Without adequate parking, MSA manager Bruce Bosben wrote in an affidavit filed with the lawsuit, Silver Cinemas “will not be able to properly service its movie-going customers, and thus, it will likely terminate the Theater Lease as it is running on a month-to-month term.” Bosben added that it’s unlikely that any other movie theater company would want to lease the theater without access to adequate parking, and that could lead to a decision to raze the theater.
So, unless the court grants some type of temporary injunction or restraining order here, it looks like this story may not end happily for the town’s residents. From who owns what to who can park where, disputes (like the bad guys in the movies), always come back. And when they involve landlord/tenant matters, contract disagreements or even collections, call in the real-life good guy litigator, Dean Sperling, who will work to resolve YOUR matter with YOUR best interests in mind!
More on the case: