http://www.DryCleaningAdvisor.com

LOS ANGELES DRY CLEANING ATTORNEY

Myles M. Mattenson is an attorney   with experience advising manufacturers and distributors of dry cleaning equipment, as well as purchasers and sellers of dry cleaning businesses throughout California.   Mr. Mattenson has authored numerous articles of interest in the Coin Laundry Association as well as Fabricare, the magazine of the Dry Cleaning and Laundry Institute.

Mr. Mattenson also successfully represented a distributor of dry cleaning equipment in an action before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal which established that valuation of a security interest in the equipment and location of the bankrupt should be based upon the worth “on location” and not “off location.”   This holding is discussed in the published decision, to be found on this website, of Ardmor Vending Co., et al. v. Peter Kim, et al., 130 F.3d 863 (9th Cir. 1997).

Mr. Mattenson, based upon his many years of experience in this industry, can assist you with dry cleaning business issues such as lease review, equipment purchases including security interest acquired by equipment distributors, competition issues, common area maintenance charges, and the purchase or sale or such businesses, including escrow instruction issues, income and expense representations, income and expense projections, and security documentation executed in connection with the purchase or sale of such businesses, including assignments of lease as collateral security, security agreements, and UCC forms.   Mr. Mattenson can also assist with litigation pertaining to the above issues as well as fraud and misrepresentation in the sale of such businesses.

Dry cleaning operators frequently secure renewal options during lease negotiations but sometimes indicate only that rent to be paid during the option period shall be the then “fair market rental value” without further definition.   Does “fair market rental value” mean a rent based upon the potential highest and best use of the property, or upon the purpose for which it has been rented?   This is an issue that the courts have considered and has held that “An interpretation that the rent during the option terms is to be based upon the highest and best use of the property despite the purposes for which lessor and lessee it could be used, would be economically and commercially unreasonable and violate the intent of the parties.”  

Consulting   a   knowledgeable attorney during lease negotiations will avoid problems of ambiguity which could give rise to litigation in the future!

Areas of expertise include: Purchase, Sale, Offer, Acceptance, Ownership, Lease, Goodwill, Leasehold Improvements, Equipment, Machinery, Competition, Non-Competition, Listing, Escrow, Escrow Instructions, Licenses, Permits, Corporation, Partnership, LLC, Limited Liability Company, Stockholder, Utilities, Common Area Maintenance, CAM, CAM Charges, Representations, Income Representations, Expense Representations, Income Projections, Expense Projections, UCC Liens, Uniform Commercial Code Liens, Bulk Sale, Fraud, Misrepresentation, Lease Assignment, Assignment of Lease as Collateral Security, Bill of Sale, Promissory Note, Security Agreement, Security Interest, Settlement, Indemnification, Implied Warranty of Merchantability, Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose, Value Transfer Machine Cards, VTM Cards, VTMLaundry, VTM Laundry, Value Transfer Machine Cards, and VTM Cards
Please also visit these websites for specific information:
Coinlaundry Law   Coinlaundry Attorney   Coinlaundry Law   Coinlaundry Lawyer   Dry Cleaners Advisor   Dry Cleaners Attorney   Dry Cleaners Law   Dry Cleaners Lawyer   Dry Cleaning Advisor   Laundromat Advisor   Laundromat Attorney   Laundromat Law   Laundromat Law Advisor   Laundromat Lawyer   Laundry Law