-77-
persuaded Lisle to allow Hyatt Corp. to be considered for the
Embarcadero Hotel's management contract.42 Weaver intervened
with Lisle on behalf of Hyatt Corp. because A.N. Pritzker
promised Weaver a 10-percent share of the “retained profits”
Hyatt Corp. might earn managing the Embarcadero Hotel if Weaver
could persuade Lisle to allow Hyatt Corp. to bid on the contract.
Ballard, Transcr. at 127, 135-137;43 Exh. 362.
42 Tenneco Corp., Weaver’s employer, apparently did not
have any equity or other interest in the Embarcadero Hotel
project. The record does not fully disclose the circumstances
that caused and led Mr. Weaver to persuade Lisle to allow Hyatt
Corp. to compete for the Embarcadero Hotel’s management contract,
nor does the record disclose what specific past dealings Mr.
Weaver may have had with Lisle. While both Lisle and A.N.
Pritzker died before the trial of the instant cases, Mr. Weaver’s
testimony was not offered by the parties. As Lisle had
previously worked in Prudential’s Houston regional office, Lisle,
in all likelihood, had already been acquainted with Mr. Weaver,
as Mr. Weaver had been employed in Tenneco’s real estate
operations for some time and, beginning in about 1968, had worked
with Ballard in putting together the development project for the
Houston Hyatt Hotel. (Emphasis added.)
The first clause emphasized above is incorrect. The
circumstances that led Weaver to influence Lisle to allow Hyatt
Corp. to bid on the Embarcadero Hotel management contract are set
forth in additional findings of fact in the text that follows.
The second clause emphasized above is notable. Ballard
denied ever meeting Weaver. Ballard, Transcr. at 247. Ballard’s
testimony on this point was not credible.
43 Ballard testified: “Mr. Weaver was bugging Mr. Lisle to
let Pritzker bid on the hotel.” Ballard, Transcr. at 127.
Page: Previous 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011