Amphitheater Gets Reprieve by O.C. Judge

An Orange County Superior Court judge Wednesday blocked the demolition of the Irvine Meadows Amphitheatre, temporarily defusing a high-stakes standoff that had threatened to level Orange County’s premier outdoor concert venue.

Judge C. Robert Jameson issued a preliminary injunction that prevents Irvine Meadows’ landlord, Los Angeles businessman Harry Shuster, from proceeding with plans to dismantle the 15,000-seat venue as part of a long-running dispute with the Irvine Co.

The decision conflicts with another judge’s ruling earlier this month that clears the way for Shuster to demolish the neighboring Wild Rivers water park, leaving attorneys on all sides baffled at the split decision.

But Jameson--citing jobs, tax revenue and capital investment the concert venue represents in South County--expressed reservations about letting Shuster use the threatened destruction of a valued community asset as a bargaining chip to win concessions from his old nemesis.

“The harm is extreme,” Jameson said. “Not only do we have the potential destruction of a $10-million facility . . . but we have businesses that are related to the amphitheater that could be destroyed.”

Attorneys for Irvine Meadows were visibly ecstatic with Wednesday’s ruling, which followed a failed attempt last December to win a temporary injunction against Shuster and his United Leisure Corp.

“He’s done,” said Irvine Meadows attorney Michael Hennigan. “There is no way Harry Shuster is going to put a blade to this property.”

But attorneys for United Leisure vowed that Irvine Meadows and the courts haven’t heard the last of Shuster, who is considering a host of legal strategies, including an appeal.

“This is far from over,” said Shuster attorney Brian Lysaght.

Irvine Meadows and the adjacent Wild Rivers water park are tenants on a 300-acre parcel of land near the El Toro Y that Shuster controls through a 29-year master lease with the Irvine Co.

Utilizing an unusual clause in that agreement, Shuster has threatened to raze both facilities when his master lease expires Feb. 28 unless the Irvine Co. pays him to go away quietly and leave those two profitable tenants on the property. The master lease gives Shuster 90 days after his lease expires to remove the improvements to the leased parcel.

What remains unclear is whether Shuster’s 90-day window can be preserved if the court proceedings drag on for months or years and Irvine Meadows ultimately fails to win its case alleging Shuster has no right to tear down the facility.

Attorneys for the amphitheater say the clock begins ticking March 1 and expires May 29, regardless of whether the case is settled by that time.

But Shuster’s attorneys dispute that contention, saying it would give Irvine Meadows an unfair advantage and deprive Shuster of his contractual rights.

Although Irvine Meadows appears safe from the wrecking ball for the time being, the fate of the water park remains in jeopardy.

Wednesday’s ruling stands in stark contrast to Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner’s Feb. 6 ruling refusing an injunction request by Wild Rivers’ owners, clearing the way for Shuster to obtain demolition permits to raze the $8-million facility. Wild Rivers has appealed that ruling.

“It is a crazy situation,” said Wild Rivers’ attorney Kathleen McDowell. “If a judge ruled that Harry Shuster cannot tear down the amphitheater, the same result should apply in our case. It’s common sense.”

Lysaght, who has agreed with McDowell on little else in the course of their pitched legal battle, concurred regarding the legal quagmire the split ruling creates.

“It puts this whole thing into complete chaos,” he said.

Wednesday’s ruling is just the latest chapter in a tangled legal history that has developed between Shuster and the Irvine Co. over their 29-year relationship.

Shuster, founder of the defunct Lion Country Safari animal park formerly located on the leased parcel, has attempted for years to turn a profit on his leasehold after the safari park went belly up in 1984.

The Irvine Co. rejected many of those plans, compelling Shuster’s company to sue its landlord for allegedly interfering with its business. In 1993, a jury awarded United Leisure $42 million in damages. But a new trial was ordered in 1994. United Leisure appealed the order, and a decision is still pending.