Editor’s note: The following story was edited to reflect a change in the acreage of the land the theater was built on. During the writing a comma instead of period was placed in the story. rrspin.com regrets the error.

Lafayette Gatling’s debt to the city increases $3,273.45 every day he fails to pay the $251,859.96 he owes on the Roanoke Rapids Theatre, a lawsuit filed in Halifax County Superior Court says.

The seven page civil lawsuit contains four evidence exhibits which include the notice ending Gatling’s contract with the city, a letter demanding the property and past due rent back, the lease agreement with the city and the contract for Gatling and L&M Hospitality to buy the 8,822 acres of land on which the venue is located.

“We’re glad to get the clock moving,” Mayor Emery Doughtie said this afternoon. “He had 30 days to respond (to the notice ending the contract). To my knowledge he hasn’t.”

The city contends in the lawsuit it entered valid contracts with Gatling through the lease and agreement to buy the land. The city says it has complied with the terms of the documents and that Gatling has committed material breaches of the documents while the city has given notice they have not been corrected.

In proving the breach of contract the city contends Gatling failed and refused to pay his rent on time and failed and refused to correct and pay the rent.

The city charges Gatling failed and refused to provide written evidence that he has applied for, has obtained and maintained a required policy of liability and property insurance. “Upon information and belief, defendant has failed and refused to purchase and provide to plaintiff evidence of life insurance on the life of purchaser’s owner, Lafayette Gatling Sr., and all rights thereunder, in the face amount of the purchase price as collateral security for purchaser’s obligation under the contract as required ...”

The city claims Gatling rented, subleased and or assigned a portion of the property without written consent.

In seeking immediate possession the city contends the security system is not being operated and life, property and casualty insurance is not being maintained. “That as a result of the foregoing, the subject real estate and personal property is at great risk of loss.”

The lawsuit also uses Gatling’s failure and refusal to pay the lease amount as grounds for immediate possession and he continues to wrongfully keep the property.

Meanwhile, the city says Gatling has defaulted not only on payments but has kept the city’s property without its consent or approval, owing the city $251,859.96 as of May 30 and the amount increases $3,273.45 per day for the past due amount.

In seeking injunctive relief, the city says the property is titled to and owned by the city and Gatling has “committed multiple breaches of the contracts that are the subject of this complaint. Defendant’s alleged breaches exposes the city’s property to potentially catastrophic loss and damages.”

The city is capable and willing to provide insurance coverage on the building, the lawsuit says, and to secure and protect it pending this litigation. “Upon information and belief, the city’s real and personal property that is the subject of this litigation is in danger of loss and destruction that would cause plaintiff to suffer immediate and irreparable damages.”

The city seeks the following:

• Possession of the venue pending litigation.

• An order declaring Gatling in default.

• An order declaring the city is the rightful owner.

• Monetary relief as the court deems proper.

• An order granting plaintiff costs, interest and attorney fees.

• Other relief the court deems proper.