October 29, 2026
Joshua Wurtzel recently spoke with the Rochester Business Journal about the legal battle surrounding Eastview Mall in Victor, New York, where town officials and mall owner Wilmorite Management Group have proposed using eminent domain to seize the property and sell it back to a Wilmorite-controlled entity.
The proposal aims to preserve the mall, its approximately 4,000 jobs and its contribution to the town’s operating budget amid a $210 million mortgage dispute with lender U.S. Bank, N.A., and commercial mortgage-backed securities investors. The lender has filed foreclosure proceedings, while Wilmorite has argued that special servicing fees and restrictions on funding have made it difficult to address the outstanding debt.
Joshua explains that the town’s primary objective is to protect the mall’s economic viability rather than help its owner avoid its financial obligations. “The town’s interest is in preserving the mall and preserving the jobs, avoiding a foreclosure and maintaining continuity of the business,” he says.
Discussing the legal challenges the lender could raise, Joshua notes that courts generally give government entities considerable latitude in determining public purpose. “Public use is really interpreted to be public purpose, and as long as there is some way that the public benefits … this is not to build a house or an apartment complex, this is to maintain a mall that is there, a business that creates jobs,” he explains. However, the lender could argue that the proposal does not serve a public purpose because the property would ultimately be transferred to a private party that already owns it.
Joshua also highlights the central dispute over just compensation. “It sounds as though everyone is acknowledging that the value of the property is way below what the outstanding mortgage debt is,” he says. He further explains that a foreclosure could offer the lender greater control over the process, including the ability to use a credit bid to acquire the property.
Lastly, Joshua emphasizes that foreclosure would not necessarily mean the mall must close. Although a foreclosure could affect existing leases, a lender might seek to preserve tenant relationships and continue generating rental income. “Just because there’s a foreclosure, that doesn’t mean the mall is going to be shut. It might be, but it’s a lot more nuanced than that,” he says.
Read the full article at Rochester Business Journal. (Subscription required)
Joshua Wurtzel is a partner at Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP who focuses his practice on complex commercial, real-estate, and commercial-lending litigation. He has been recognized on the Best Lawyers “Ones to Watch® in America” list in Commercial Litigation and the New York Metro Super Lawyers® "Rising Stars" list in Business Litigation.