Many years ago, four developers created a joint venture in a resort village. Nearest comparable resort more than 50 miles away. Each golf course limited to 9 holes, and each golf course has an accompanying hotel/condo. A pathway connects the courses.
Developers ended the JV, and each developer owned one hotel and one adjacent golf course. Until now, the four developers sold one week and single day golf tickets that allow unlimited access to all four courses. There’s a year-to-year agreement renewal. Revenue from one week passes dviided based on usage. Golfers could pay to play just one course, but few did.
A golf course, owned by Saul, averaged 19% of usage. Just recently, two other developers sold their portion to Murray, the fourth developer. Murray then told Saul he would not agree to unlimited passes allowing purchasers to play on Saul’s course, unless Saul agreed to a fixed and much less than 19% share of the revenue. Murray also said he would not accept vouchers from guests at Saul’s hotel who desired to play Murray’s three courses. Saul declined the offer.
As a result, less people played Saul’s course. He decides not to take another bath next year, at least without a lawsuit. Discuss the facts and legal theories with support or do not support such a complaint including the cause(s) of action which can be asserted and the defenses thereto. Who prevails on each issue and why?