Mr. Albert was well represented by good counsel and I congratulate him on the ruling. The outcome of the case hindered on the testimony (or lack thereof) of [a key witness], who was the sole reason I filed a contract interference case in the first place. Unfortunately, when asked to verify the information he had originally given me, [that witness] changed his story during deposition and never showed up to testify during the trial hearing even though he was under subpoena. This left me without any corroboration of my original claim.Here's the judge's conclusion:
All this aside, we are excited to move forward with the development of Archer Park as we have several perspective clients interested in building with us!
Albert has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Delesk abused process by initiating this litigation. Albert has proven that the litigation was initiated for an improper purpose- to silence the opposition of Albert and Gruen to the Archer Park Project. The improper purpose of the litigation is evident in Delesk’s offer to dismiss the case in return for $5,000 and silencing Albert’s opposition to the Project just days after threatening Albert and his wife with damages in excess of $3,000,000. The litigation initiated by Delesk had no basis in fact. Albert has incurred damages in defending the claims asserted by Delesk. Albert has proven his claim for abuse of process. In this case and under these facts, the abuse of process was the initiation of the litigation itself. The damage incurred by Albert is $49,195.58, plus interest.
The claims asserted by Delesk were substantially groundless and vexatious. Attorney fees are awarded in favor of Albert. Delesk has the option a requesting a hearing on the amount of attorney fees to be determined separately pursuant to C.R.S. 13-17-103. The award of attorney fees pursuant to statute shall merge into the award of attorney fees as damages such that the monetary judgment shall be not be duplicated.