Siegel remains at helm of complexes

Owners of a Siegel Suites apartment complex on Tuesday lost their court bid to oust real estate investor Stephen Siegel as manager, leaving him in control for the indefinite future.

Because the limited partnership that owns Siegel Suites on Cambridge Avenue was set up in California, Clark County District Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez ruled that California law applies. She decided the owners should have spelled out reasons for firing Siegel beyond three terse paragraphs in a March 19 letter.

After the hearing, Aviva Gordon, attorney for the owners, handed Siegel attorney Mark Ferrario another termination notice that went into greater detail.

"I guess this is the real one," Ferrario said.

The latest version repeats complaints already spelled out in court papers, including charging the owners more for security than other Siegel properties, using revenues to make political contributions and tacking on other expenses that had nothing to do with property.

However, Ferrario also said in court he would seek to shift the case to California, a move that could slow the owners.

Although Gonzalez sided with Siegel this time, last month she indicated that owners generally have a right to fire a manager, even if they might face damages if they do it improperly.

In the meantime, Clark County District Judge Mark Denton set a Sept. 5 hearing on whether Siegel should ousted as manager of the Siegel Suites and Twain Avenue properties. Although there are some technical differences between the two cases, most of the owners and circumstances are the same.

Siegel has had no equity stake in either property since a financial structuring in 2010 that kept Siegel as manager.

Ferrario did not indicate whether he would also seek to move that case to the Los Angeles area.

The rupture between Siegel and the owners came into the open after a third Siegel Suites was turned over to a receiver. The owners had substantial stakes in that property as well. They demanded a detailed accounting .

In addition, the owners charged in court documents that the way certain expenses were charged to their properties amounted to embezzlement.