Virginia Appeals Court Rules Against Cordish

The Virginia Court of Appeals dismissed Cordish Companies’ $100 million lawsuit against Norfolk, alleging Cordish should have had exclusive casino development rights. Instead, the Pamunkey Indian Tribe will develop the HeadWaters Resort and Casino.

Virginia Appeals Court Rules Against Cordish

The Virginia Court of Appeals of Virginia recently upheld a lower court decision dismissing a $100 million lawsuit brought by Baltimore-based Cordish Companies against Norfolk, Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Authority and City Attorney Bernard Pishko.

Cordish-owned LLC Norfolk District Associates, developers of Waterside District since 2013, filed the lawsuit in 2021, alleging the city breached its 2013 lease agreement outlining the potential support and rights of the development to become a casino site. The move followed Norfolk’s 2019 land deal with the Pamunkey Indian Tribe leading to development of the HeadWaters Resort and Casino next to Harbor Park, located less than a mile from Waterside. Those plans still are in progress.

Norfolk District Associates claimed that according to the 2013 development agreement and lease, it should have had exclusive rights to develop and operate a Waterside-based casino. The company alleged the city breached its contract and purposefully excluded Waterside from consideration as a casino site.

A Richmond Circuit Court judge dismissed the case in 2022, but Cordish and its lawyers appealed. Judge Richard Y. AtLee, writing on behalf of the 3-judge appellate panel, affirmed the lower court decision, declaring the written agreement regarding Waterside “does not place an obligation on the City and NRHA to use NDA to develop a casino.”

AtLee wrote, “All of NDA’s assignments of error, and the underlying claims, turn on the premise that the City and NRHA breached enforceable contractual obligations owed to NDA under the lease agreement. Because we find that section 10.2.1 was an unenforceable agreement to agree and a casino was not a permitted use under the terms of the agreement, we find that the circuit court did not err in sustaining the demurrers.”

In a statement, Pishko wrote, “We are pleased to have the Court confirm that Cordish and John Lynch sued the city, city attorney and NRHA without a basis.”