It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Judge To Rule On Haunted Restaurant

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 02:32 PM
Orlando, FL., a lawsuit filed on behalf of the owners of a Japanese restaurant asks a judge to decide whether or not their building is haunted, and if it is, is that grounds for breaking the lease. This may be one of the first times a court has been asked to rule on evidence of paranormal activity. The Church Street Station Entertainment Complex has a long and rich history of tales of the paranormal. Many professional ghost hunters have conducted investigations at the site and ghost siting tours are still conducted there. Workers and other individuals who witnessed what they claim to be ghosts and other strange phenomenon have all coorborated the claims in the lawsuit. An attorney for the buildings owners has stated that he believes that the ghosts in question are "good" ghosts and therefore it shouldn't be a problem for the restaurants owners.
"I asked them if these were good ghosts or bad ghosts, and if they were good ghosts why it was a problem,'' said David Simmons, an attorney representing the building's owners, who include boy band promoter Lou Pearlman. Simmons is also a member of the Florida House of Representatives.

Christopher and Yoko Chung, the owners of Amura Japanese Restaurant, had planned to move into the building last October, but backed out of the lease.

The Chungs' attorney, Lynn Franklin, said Thursday several subcontractors and other individuals have reported seeing ghosts or other apparitions at night. A company called Orlando Ghost Tours regularly led visitors through the property until it changed hands in 2001 and still begins its tours in front of the building.

"It's very serious,'' Franklin said. "A lot of people are corroborating having seen incidents in this location.''

Franklin said Christopher Chung's religious beliefs as a Jehovah's Witness required him to "avoid encountering or having any association with spirits or demons.'' Chung also objected to the offer for an exorcism, which is a Roman Catholic rite not acceptable to a Jehovah's Witness, Franklin said.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Well, this is my hometown, and it's a strange place. As for the city's most popular night spot being haunted, I'll wait for the judges ruling!!! If the building is deemed haunted by a judge than it will go along away towards backing up the beliefs in an after-life held by people around the world since the origins of man. This should be an interesting case, assuming the buildings owners do not settle out of court to avoid the high legal costs.

Related News Links:

[edit on 10-9-2005 by DJDOHBOY]

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 02:44 PM
Actually, this has happened before. The case was Stambovsky v. Ackley, 572 N.Y.S.2d 672 (N.Y. App. 1991).

Quoting from the ruling,

The unusual facts of this case, as disclosed by the record, clearly warrant a grant of equitable relief to the buyer who, as a resident of New York City, cannot be expected to have any familiarity with the folklore of the Village of Nyack. Not being a "local," plaintiff could not readily learn that the home he had contracted to purchase is haunted. Whether the source of the spectral apparitions seen by defendant seller are parapsychic or psychogenic, having reported their presence in both a national publication ("Readers' Digest") and the local press (in 1977 and 1982, respectively), defendant is estopped to deny their existence and, as a matter of law, the house is haunted.

It should be pointed out from the start that the court isn't saying that ghosts exist, just that for all legal purposes the house in question was haunted. The seller claimed repeatedly, including to the magazines mentioned above, that the house he owned was haunted, to the point where it became local "knowledge." The purchasers were unaware of this, and bought the house thinking it was "normal." The seller never told them it was haunted, but because he had already claimed it was, he was legally bound to accept knowledge that the house was haunted, in his own opinion, and he should have disclosed that knowledge to the buyers before he made the sale.

-koji K.

[edit on 8-9-2005 by koji_K]

posted on Sep, 8 2005 @ 02:50 PM
The owners will love this.

I remember cases [although not court cases] in the U.K. of things like this and every single restaurant has increased its business because of it. People flock from miles to go to it because it has been classified as being haunted.

It can boost the value of the house as well.

I can't wait to see the verdict. :-)

posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 05:18 PM

Originally posted by Odium
It can boost the value of the house as well.

We have moved a few times and each time we bought a new
house I specifically asked the realtor if it was haunted, if any
murders or suicides took place in it, or if it was ever used as
a funeral home. If the answer was 'yes' to any of those
questions, I wouldn't even look at it.

I have lived in haunted houses in the past. They aren't fun.
I always try to avoid it if it all possible.

Honestly, I have come to the conclusion that ghosts are everywhere
and in every home. Some are just more active than others. Those
active homes are the ones I try to avoid. I think every place has
spooks, but most people are too busy and too loud to pay attention
to the obvious spiritual activity going on around them.

new topics

top topics

log in