Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Make sure you get receipts or keep some sort of documentation of payment and get him to sign a Satisfaction of Judgment that you can file with the court. Keep in mind that you also owe court costs and probably post judgment interest so you'll want to get a copy of the judgment to determine the costs and the interest.
  3. The Awad case does not represent an exception allowing tort claims in Claims Court. It does not address that circumstance. It addresses the opposite issue, whether a contract case that the plaintiff brought also had tort claims that could be litigated in district court. The problem the courts face is determining what the real cause of action is: a contract claim, a tort claim, or whether there are both independent tort and contract claims. As the Awad case points out, if the duty that gives rise to the claim is a contractual one, then the case is really a contract case not withstanding that the reason the defendant breached the contract is because he or she did the performance called for in the contract negligently. And if it is a contract claim against the government then it has to go to the Court of Claims. The rule in the case law is clear and reinforces the statute: tort cases cannot be brought in the Court of Claims. "The limited statutory jurisdiction of the court cannot be expended beyond the bounds established by Congress. Soriano v. United States, 352 U.S. 270, 273, 77 S.Ct. 269, 1 L.Ed.2d 306 (1957); Carney v. United States, 462 F.2d 1142, 1144, 199 Ct.Cl. 160, 162 (1972). The court specifically lacks jurisdiction in cases sounding in tort. Somali Development Bank v. United States, 508 F.2d 817, 205 Ct.Cl. 741 (1974)." Tree Farm Dev. Corp. v. United States, 585 F.2d 493, 498 (Ct. Cl. 1978). Consider the case of King v. United States, That case is a curious one in that the Court of Claims decided that it had the power to hear declaratory judgments involving contract claims. On the face of it, that seemed reasonable since all a declaratory judgment involves is basically an advance determination of whether a particular situation would breach the contract, and the Claims Court has jurisdiction over contract claims. But on appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected that expansion of the Claims Court jurisdiction, saying that for the Claims Court to have jurisdiction, that jurisdiction must be expressly stated in the statute: United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4–5, 89 S. Ct. 1501, 1502–03, 23 L. Ed. 2d 52 (1969). Based on the holding there, in order for the Claims Court to hear a tort case, the statute must expressly provide for that. It doesn't, and thus exceptions allowing tort claims to be brought would not be allowed. The Supreme Court did not reverse another part of the King case, however, that speaks to a common rule regarding jurisdiction in that court — one cannot get into Claims Court by refashioning the claim as one that is permitted in the Claims Court: "Claimants with tort claims against the Government, or other causes of actions over which we have no power, cannot evade the subject-matter limitations on our jurisdiction by refashioning their actions in the terms of a declaratory proceeding." King v. United States, 390 F.2d 894, 909 (Ct. Cl. 1968), rev'd on other grounds, 395 U.S. 1, 89 S. Ct. 1501, 23 L. Ed. 2d 52 (1969). Remember, at the time the court made this statement it had held it had jurisdiction to hear declaratory relief cases. So the statement can be understand to mean more generally that one cannot get into the Court of Claims by refashioning a tort claim to be a claim that the court could hear, like a contract case. So it is not about an exception to the tort rule. It is about looking under the claims as plead to determine what the real cause of action is. If it's a tort claim, it cannot be brought in the Court of Claims. If it is a contract claim against the federal government, it cannot be brought in district court.
  4. Strictly research, my question is there an exception to the rule of 28 US.C 1491(a)(1) that a claim sounding in tort can't be maintained the court of federal claims? The reason I ask is because I believe I found an exception to the rule see e.g., Awad v. United States, 301 F.3d 1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2002) ("If an action arises `primarily from a contractual undertaking,' jurisdiction lies in the [Court of Federal Claims] `regardless of the fact that the loss resulted from the negligent manner in which defendant performed its contract.'" (quoting San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage Dist. v. United States, 877 F.2d 957, 960 (Fed. Cir. 1989))).(See internal citations) Do I understand that if the injured party is able to sufficiently prove that injuries they sustained would have not occurred or could not occur except through breach of contract then they could then a tort claim can be maintained becuase the injuries are attributtable to the breach? or claims sounding in tort?
  5. I live in PA and moved out of an apartment back in 2018 and owed rent, i owed a couple of months because I fell on hard times. As due his right, the landlord went to small court to file a suit. I am trying to fix my debt and just simply need to know if the money is to go to the landlord or do I pay through the court?
  6. You've been using the strip with the knowledge and constructive consent of the other owners so you have no rights under adverse possession. What I suggest you do is put up fences on your property lines, the lines delineated by your survey and forget about that strip and the other fences. You should have done that a long time ago.
  7. Yesterday
  8. We purchased 1 acre with a house 16 years ago in Collin County, TX. It was originally part of a 12 acre plot of land. The owners carved out an acre with the house they were living in. They built another house on the remaining 11 acres. Going into closing, it was discovered that the property owners did not survey the 1 acre. We had to wait for that to be completed. It was and we purchased the property. The caveat being the owners eyeballed the 1 acre along an original fence line when they listed the house & property. Once the survey was completed we discovered that 2 of the fence lines were approximately 10 -15 feet into the owners surrounding property. This was pointed out at closing but the owners didn't want to move the fence so they told us not to worry about it, they might move the fence one day or sell us the property. About 5 years after buying the property the owners decided to move the fence. They got as far as putting the fence poles up, again eyeballing the location and not getting another survey. Due to a series of tragic events (the Husband and their oldest son passed away within weeks of each other) and the fence was never completed (only the poles were installed). The surviving Wife remained in the house another 2 years then sold the property (owner financed). At some point the new owners paid off their loan to the previous owner and financed the property (11 acres surround my 1 acre). The original owner told us that she informed the new owner that the fence was actually on his property. We have been keeping up the strip of land for the past 16 years. There is a pear tree near the property line as well as a peach tree. We also planted blueberries but that only lasted a year. I also installed a water main cutoff valve in the corner of the property , but it is not actually within our property boundaries. We mow and trim the grass. One of the fences on the backside of the property is rotted and has fallen over. My question: Do I have any legal right according to Texas law to that strip of property? Thank you.
  9. Is this a mobile home park? What state? Could be, but my guess is that there is a lot more to the story than you are telling. Or, did it happen like this: Man has a beer by the pool. Landlord comes over drinking his own beer and says "No alcohol by the pool. I'm going to evict you." Then what?
  10. You should contact the real estate agent listing the property and explain that he doesn't own it.
  11. What do the "rules" say about eviction? Are the rules stated or incorporated in the deeds to the residences?
  12. This is in a 55 and up retirement community. Homeowners own their home, but not the land. There are published rules and regulation. In common areas like the pool, there are posted rules as well. In the published rules it states a tenant may be "subject to restriction or revocation" of use of the facilities if rules are not followed. A gentleman had a beer with him at a table by the pool. Rules state "no alcohol". The landlord is threatening to evict, but has not followed his own stated rules. Is this legal? Thanks
  13. "End up in court" Interesting, what kind of legal repercussions? AT least I'd have his attention. He has listed the entire property for sale, including my portion without my permission..
  14. Short answer, yes. Once the estate is settled you can demand that he get his own water access and it may take legal action to make him do it. If you cut off his water now or even after the estate is settled on your own you will likely end up in court.
  15. "But you don't own the property yet." But neither does he. So you are saying I have to continue to pay for him pumping the water that goes through my basement. The garage apartment was added years after the farm house.
  16. No, of course not. But you don't own the property yet. Then hire a lawyer to properly address those problems.
  17. I live on a farm in SE PA. I have been named the heir to the original farm house. There is a garage apartment on the same property that was left to an uncle. The water from the garage apartment comes directly from the basement of the original farm house. My uncle is causing a lot of legal problems for me. I would like to shut off the water which is coming through my house. We are paying for the electricity to pump his water. Can I do this? The estate has not yet been distributed. I live in the original farm house.
  18. Thank you for your reply. While I didn't get a copy of a petition, I did get a copy of the citation which appears to conform more in part with Rule 117(a)(5). The delinquency occurred after the Notice of Protest was timely filed.
  19. Doesn't matter. The mortgage department that lends you money is a million miles away from the department that takes your money and pays you a pittance. Some bureaucratic moron has got it into his/her head that you have to pay $36,000 to buy insurance in order to get your loan. I have no idea how you fight that. Your financing contingency should allow you to cancel the purchase and the seller can put the property back on the market.
  20. My brother told me a story about a similar incident he was involved in. The suspect refused to hold the board containing his name and identification number up in front of him as he was being photographed. So, my brother handcuffed the suspect behind his back and yelled to another officer, "Get me a couple of thumbtacks." The suspect elected to hold up the signboard.
  21. You can find an attorney with the help of this article. It can be hired in this article. It is a good way to hire any Lawyer for any cases.
  22. Everybody must read this article. There is a lot of information holiday in this article. Real Estate Transaction Process
  23. It's not his option whether to get booked or not. He can cooperate or not as he chooses, but in the end he WILL be processed and booked. Lack of cooperation can result in additional charges.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...