WWR #05534644 STATE OF INDIANA COUNTY OF FLOYD SS: IN THE FLOYD CIRCUIT COURT CAUSE NO. 22C01-0610-MF-697
FIFTH THIRD BANK, (LOUISVILLE) Plaintiff, v. LEOPOLDO ESPINOZA MORTGAGEIT, INC. UNKNOWN OCCUPANT (S) 1003 E. Main Street New Albany, Indiana 47150 Defendants
NOTICE OF SUIT
SUMMONS BY
PUBLICATION
TO: Leopoldo Espinoza BE IT KNOWN, that Fifth Third Bank, the above-named Plaintiff, by its attorney, Nicholas K. Rohner, has filed in the office of the Clerk of the Floyd Circuit Court its Complaint against the above-named Defendant, and the said Plaintiff having also filed in said Clerk’s office the affidavit of a competent person showing that the residence and whereabouts of the Defendant, Leopoldo Espinoza, upon diligent inquiry is unknown, and that said cause of action is for default on the promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage on the following described real estate in Floyd County, State of Indiana, to wit: Parcel I All Lots 5 and 6 and the South 43 feet of Lot No. 9 in Plat No. 1, Floyd County, Indiana, described as follows: Beginning on the North line of East Main Street as its intersection with the East line of East Tenth Street; running thence North on the East line of East Tenth Street 163 feet; thence East parallel with Main Street, 120 feet to a 20 foot alley; thence South along the West line of said alley, 163 feet to the intersection of the North line of East Main Street with the West line of said alley; thence West on the North line of Main Street 120 feet to the Place of Beginning. Parcel II Lot No. Ten (10) and the North 7 feet of Lot No. Nine (9) on Upper Tenths Street in Plat No. 1 of the Floyd County, Indiana records. commonly known as 1003 East Main Street, New Albany, Indiana 47150. NOW, THEREFORE, said Defendant is hereby notified of the filing and pendency of said Complaint against them and that unless he appears and answers or otherwise defends thereto within thirty (30) days after the last notice of this action is published, judgment by default may be entered against him for the relief demanded in the Complaint.
Dated December 18, 2006 Eugenea Freiberger Clerk, Floyd Circuit Court Nicholas K. Rohner (23364-15) Attorney for Plaintiff, Fifth Third Bank WELTMAN, WEINBERG & REIS, CO., L.P.A. 525 Vine Street, Suite 800 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Telephone: (513) 723-2200
Facsimile: (513) 723-2230
Email NRohner@Weltman.com
Dec. 26, Jan. 2, 9
19 comments:
thanks for posting this NAC. Myself and many neighbors have been appalled at what has happened to this magnificent house. We pray for good preservation minded owners next.
It is a shame. Our firm was initially interested in trying to buy the building a year or two ago after the first time the "for sale by owner" signs went up in the yard, yet we could never get a return call or even an square answer or price despite our interest. Thus, we've moved onto another project (soon to begin contstruction) along Main Street. Its quite sad to see the decay in the building & its property. While its too late for us, hopefully other persons with the means to restore it will be found...
No teasing us with this "new project." A preview, perhaps?
I've also seen the plans for the new addition and it does not fit New Albanys Main Street, but that is just my opinion. Rather I found it derivative of Monroe Shine's building. It's suburban looking and not at all compatible with the historic streetscape. I for one would hate to see it built as designed.
It’s definitely exciting to see new construction downtown. Can I assume the project is being built in the boundary of the downtown historic district? If so, as a member of the HPC, I look forward to reviewing the project at an upcoming meeting.
Gina - The design guidelines for new construction are available
on-line at http://www.newalbanypreservation.com/
Just click on the “resources” tab on the home page and scroll to New Construction. HPC members will use those guidelines when reviewing the project.
A map of the Downtown district is also on that page as well (see Downtown Historic District).
Not to tease, but all I'll say at this point is that we've retained a highly respected Louisville architect, who has worked very hard and is putting the finishing touches on a gorgeous concept for an office that we're very excited about presenting to the HPC.
Architecture is like literature, fine art or music - it involves a considerable amount of subjective taste. Some might like our design (thanks, Richard...), some might not (g.coyle), but either way, we're very confident that it is a tasteful and elaborate design that will only compliment and enhance the downtown district.
We had a decision to make, whether to leave the downtown area and head to other points within the community, or to try to make it work downtown. We decided that we wanted to commit our energy and resources to the downtown district as best we could. We tried very hard to find a suitable existing structure to rehabilitate, but there were very few within the market that could accomodate all of our needs, and those which might have worked were priced in the stratosphere for their condition (or were recently torn down). Thus, the need to build something new was inevitable.
It would be nice to have the resources to build a marvelous italianate design, or something equally exotic to compliment the Parthenon building a block away. However, in the end, it is an office, not a musuem, so some amount of daily practicality will inevitably have to prevail.
Besides, how can anything be much worse than the gravel lot which sits on its future home at 3rd and Main?
Hmm ... that being the case, I'd rather see a Columbus, Indiana design than a Monroe, Shine design any day. Apart from historical considerations, it seems to me that we build pole barns rather than new, interesting architecture.
I suppose if you lump together the Monroe Shine building, the Melhiser, Endris, tucker building, the Lorch Naville building, etc you start to see who has done much to destroy the historic fabric of downtown. Lawguy - with all due respect, most of the downtown is vacant, your argument that nothing which could be renovated is available seems odd. I'm sure a qualified architect came up with your plans, but what I saw did not strike me as appropriate in concept or scale or proportion for that streetscape.
I agree very enthusiastically with Roger. If in previous eras people had sought to construct only inexpensive structures that would blend with the existing architecture we would not have many of the treasures that make New Albany wonderful. I would much rather see something that incorporates new ideas in architecture in order to add to the architectural capital of our city than a facsimile of existing structures. Of course, there does need to be attention in the design process to issues of scale, materials, shape, etc. to create a design that will add to the whole streetscape rather than distracting from it - and at times this comes down to taste. Building in historic districts and creating innovative architecture are not mutually exclusive goals. I commend the firm for taking the leap of working with an architect to design a custom building and for choosing to stay downtown. I look forward to seeing the design as well – when’s the unveiling?
Using G.Coyle's logic, the three businesses she mentioned should all have forgone investing their collective hundreds of thousands (or millions?) of dollars into the downtown community to relocate to the burbs, out Charlestown Road.
Gosh...wouldnt that be great? We'd be rid of the 3 buildings that fail to arouse her subjective artistic juices, and in their places we'd have three more old buildings to accompany the Nicholson Appliance Building (such a gorgeous sight on our most highly visible intersection), The Fair Store, (also dazzling as it falls down), the empty Reitz Store on Main, or the "luxurious" Smith Furniture store (which is in such bad shape that it couldnt even draw a minimum bid at auction).
Actually, we'd most likely have three more empty lots.
And... we'd still be waiting for the magic "revitalization fairy" to come downtown and cast her wand.
Dont get me wrong...I agree that historic Madison is a great place to visit on a saturday in October, but having grown up and spent nearly 20 years there, as well as having moved away as a young professional, I can tell you first hand that the area is starved for the investment of small business in the community. Small boutiques and candle stores are not enough to sustain a downtown community as a whole - it takes the commitment of small businesses as well. Being a small little river-town waiting for the odd regional tourists to come for the day is not progressive thinking.
To the extent that small community minded businesses are working to help GROW our community TOGETHER with those interested in preservation, it should be seen as a postive - not a negative. We cannot always build buildings like the Carnegie Museum, The Elsby Building or the Parthenon - it just isnt practical in this day and age. And we cant spend TWICE the investment just to rehabilitate an old building that some absentee owner now wants to sell for five times its net worth.
We can, and we have, put together plans for an attractive office building, with some elements of contemporary design that will set it apart, while still serving as a functional office.
My point, whether you agree or not, is that the businesses you cast stones at have each made a commitment to the downtown area. We can all either continue boarding up windows and move further out Charlestown Road while the downtown continues to fade away, or we can laud those businesses who are trying hard to invest in the downtown, so long as they work hard to do so in a tasteful manner.
Downtown businesses bring employees to the district to patronize the new restaurants, and they bring interest and resources to the community. There are many other positives that accompany the investiture other than simply whether the buildings will be landmarks for the century to come.
Please understand - I'm not wanting to match wits or verbal spars - its not my intent with this post. However, I'm very proud of the building we're hoping to build, and to be among those investing in the future of our downtown. We're chosing to spend our resources HERE, in New Albany, and commit our future to the the downtown for decades, and perhaps generations to come.
We'll unveil the design sometime soon. Until then, the debate can rage on.....
Cheers!
Sloburn -
I agree with you - I can see both sides of the issue too.
However, to have people living downtown to create the environment you envision, you need to have people who also work downtown too. You wont get downtown residents purchasing and developing condos & lofts (whether lawyers, artists or otherwise) if they have to drive elsewhere to their job.
Revitalization, both residential and commercial, go hand in hand.
It befuddles me that "we" want our city to be the recipient of downtown redevelopment, growth and investment; yet "we" also insist on telling those willing to do so how they need to spend their money. It may be like the old chicken/egg argument, but without encouraging, assisting and congratulating the downtown pioneers, almost irrespective of their enterprise, there will not be the people and businesses there to draw the commercial, retail, dining and entertainment establishments that will then bring even more people to the downtown area. I would love to see the unique, outstanding architecture of Columbus added to our city, but more than that, I want to see investment in our city. Trying to have it all often times means we end up with very little. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but it's also in the eye of those who "be holding" the capital. If this law firm is within the historic district and they comply with whatever they must to build, then I think the rest of us need to offer them our thanks for staying and support their efforts. Sending them any other message also sends it to other individuals and groups who might be looking to do the same.
lawguy - time will tell if your design is considered sensitive to NA. I'm glad small business people are so enthused about downtown but to my mind, the collection of law and accounting offices, are a depressing hijack of what could have been... who came up with the standard one story windowless suburban roof line look anyway? Rather short sighted developers have tried for years to reduce the density downtown - one of it's better aspects, now it's littered with these awful mean little accounting buildings. I'd just hate to see more of that. It really misses the point of what it means to be in a dense grid town.
I haven't heard any comments on the architectural design of the hospital.
Even though it is not in downtown, it is probably the most recent significant construction project close to downtown.
What do the readers think of its design?
Battlestar Galactica.
Dear Roger, The recordas at the courthouse have the last name as "espinosa." the lawsuit and your poost have the last name as "espinoza." which is correct?
Maury
Sorry about the spelling errors. This is the 5th time I have tried to post on your blog.
maury
Not sure. I'm assuming there's a family tie with the people we previously identified as Espinosa (when they ran California's and emphasized their ties to Sistah Hicks's church).
By the way, might there be a story here somewhere about the church, the sister, the Espinosas, and all the money floating (or not) around?
Excuse me - I've got to go do some "laundry."
In answering HB's post, I'll go on record that I think the design of the hospital is very interesting. While the exterior fascade reminds me more of a Las Vegas hotel with its glass and angles than a hospital, I think it has an inherent style and elegance to it.
While it wouldnt have been my first choice, I still recognize that it was very well designed and adds an interesting nuance to the city's architecture, such as it is...
I like it.
Post a Comment