Trainlawyer wrote:On first reading it appears that the underlying contractual right cited by Brother McFarland would be the first two sentences Section 12, Paragraph 1, Terms and Conditions in the REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS dated June 18, 2003, and incorporated by reference in Page 1, Paragraph A, of the actual contract.Trainlawyer I have a question, the original SIR filing states:"The lessee shall not assign, sublet, subcontract or otherwise dispose of this agreement, or any right, duty or interest herein, without the prior written consent of the County. Any attempted assignment without such consent shall be void."As there is no resolution allowing any such assignment in the minutes of the Board of Chosen Freeholders over the last year, it would appear that SRNJ was not legally competent to enter into the agreement with Salem Industrial Railway.
Anyone who wishes is free to contact Salem county and obtain copies of all of the documents which comprise the contract.
I will stand with my assertion that the filing itself was not "false".
"(c) 1 statement that an agreement has been reached or detail* about when an agreement will
An agreement has been reached between the County and SIR for SIR's operation of the
subject rail line."
So it appears to me (though I am not a lawyer) that the agreement was between the County and SIR and not SRNJ, no?