Information
Digital ID
upr000350-125
UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.Mr. C. M. Cory 2- April 20,1956 the construction work the District was required to do had been done, with the exception of a couple stub ends of pipes which had not been removed. I attach copy of letter from Mr. Bates to me, dated April 9th, in which he states that those two facilities have been removed! so it looks as though all the work has been done and the District is entitled to draw down most of the relocation fund. I wish you would go into this matter with Mr. Renshaw and Mr. McNamee, and get more details with respect to the unliquidated claims, and then possibly you and Mr. McNamee can draw up either a contract or some amended escrow instructions, possibly a short contract would be preferable, to permit the District to take down this fund except such amounts as are necessary to take care of the unliquidated claims. There is no reason why the District should not have the greater part of this fund and get some interest on it or use it for other purposes, and not have it lying idle in the title company. Possibly you will want to discuss the matter with representatives of the title company and see how they would prefer to have the matter handled. £. E. Bennett