Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/19/2019 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    pg1067

    Subdividing

    The sentence you have quoted says that an owner of a building lot (or any interest in a building lot) may not subdivide the lot or interest unless he/she/it complies with applicable laws. That is not the same thing as "subdividing is permitted as long as you comply with all applicable laws," but that seems to be the implication. One would need to read the entirety of the CC&Rs to know for sure.
  2. 1 point
    adjusterjack

    Subdividing

    That must be why your husband wants to get on the HOA Board.
  3. 1 point
    pg1067

    HOA Board Director question

    Given that we know nothing about your situation beyond what's in your post (i.e., we haven't read your CC&Rs or HOA by-laws, and you didn't identify your state), doesn't this answer your question?
  4. 1 point
    pg1067

    Subdividing

    Are you sure this is an accurate quote? If it is, it's poorly written; there seems to be a word missing in this part: "nor may any easement or other interest therein." Taking out the part I mentioned previously leaves you with this: "No building lot may be further subdivided . . . unless such subdivision complies with all applicable laws." Since subdividing and granting easements are two completely different things, I'm at a loss why someone would have combined the topics in this single sentence.
  5. 1 point
    Which amounts to the same thing: banning all private arbitration. Realistically, what would be the difference between state run arbitrations and the courts?
  6. 1 point
    pg1067

    2 years later

    If that's the case, then why would the lease say this: ??? It's not illegal. Your options are to pay or not to pay. But here's a question: if your understanding was "that there was nothing gas in the house," then you presumably did not use any gas appliances (e.g., heater, stove, oven, gas clothes dryer). Right? Or if you did use such things, where did you think the gas was coming from? A statute of limitations is a law that says how long after accrual of a cause of action a plaintiff has to file a lawsuit. Statutes of limitations vary widely from state to state, and you didn't identify your state (despite the prompt that you do so). However, I don't know any state in which the SOL would be less than two years, and it's much longer in most states. First, nothing in this quoted paragraph says "that the gas should have been cut off 3 days after [you] moved in." Is that statement in a different part of the lease, or did you mis-type when you wrote that in your original post? Second, the statement that "utilities are defined [to include] . . . gas" completely contradicts your statement that you were "told that there was nothing gas in the house." Third, this quoted language makes it clear that it was your obligation to have utilities, including gas, put "into [your] name . . . within three days from commencement of the lease." Should the landlord have made you aware of the situation before now? Yes. Does the landlord's failure to make you aware mean it has no claim against you? No. Should the landlord give you time to pay the charges? Yes, but it isn't legally required to do so.
  7. 1 point
    Not rocket science, no. Which means it should be clear to you that the situation in the Tumey case is vastly different from the arbitration situation you present. It is (1) a criminal case in which (2) the judicial officer got compensated more for finding for against the defendant, making for a direct conflict of of interest and providing incentive to rule against defendants, denying them a fair trial. Arbitration is a civil proceeding and the problem about which you complain is not one in which the deal is that the arbiter gets paid more for ruling for the business instead of the consumer. The arbiter gets paid the same either way he or she rules in that case. The fear you raise is more indirect than in the Tumey case: the fear by the arbiter that if he or she rules too often against the arbiter that the business will look to someone else for future arbitration. While I agree that's a potential problem, it does not provide the same kind of incentive that was present in Tumey. And, of course, the considerations are quite different in a criminal versus civil setting. While I agree that more should be done to deal with the problem you mention in the situation where a consumer is arbitrating with a large business who selects the arbitration firm, your solution of simply banning all arbitrations is tossing out the baby with the bath water. There are a lot of arbitrations that do not result in the problem that concerns you, and there is no reason to ban those just to fix the consumer vs big business situation.
  8. 1 point
    cbg

    Sick/vacation for salaried employees

    Yes. Salaried exempt employees MAY be required to use PTO for a partial day. However, there is nothing in either state or Federal law that says salaried exempt employees MUST be required to use PTO for a partial day. Or a full day. I don't agree with your management's decision but it's not a violation of anything except possibly their own policy. There's nothing we can tell you here that you can use to force them to stop the practice.
  9. 1 point
    PayrollHRGuy

    Desperately need help

    Fallguy, Work Comp lawyers are a dime a dozen. If you can't get one to take your case there is a reason for it and that reason is most likely you don't have a case.
  10. 1 point
    Yes, it was about a government entity. In the case of the Colorado baker, the Colorado Civil Rights Division, (CCRD) a Colorado state agency, took enforcement action against the baker because the baker allegedly violated Colorado state law in refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. The baker then appealed the decision of the CCRD claiming that the CCRD violated the baker's Constitutional rights, a case that eventually was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. So you see, the case was all about the government's alleged violation of the baker's constitutional rights, not about whether the baker had any constitutional obligation to serve the gay couple. Indeed, there was constitutional obligation on the part of the baker; the obligation to not discriminate against gay couples was imposed by Colorado statute, not the federal Constitution. The lawyers responding here do know the law, and if you were willing to step back and realize that perhaps you don't know the law better than lawyers do you might learn something. 😁
  11. 1 point
    Let me see if I can clear this up for you. 1 - You got fired. 2 - Your employer has an appeal process. 3 - You appealed by explaining why you shouldn't have been fired. 4 - Your employer denied your appeal saying that you didn't convince them to rehire you. Guess what, bub. You got your "due process." You got whatever the "due process" the employer said it was. That you didn't like the process or the results is unfortunate for you but it's a decision that you are stuck with and need to move on. No, I'm not an attorney. But I have been an employee of someone or other for 40 years and I've been fired a few times myself. With that experience I can tell you to come down off your high dudgeon and go find another job. Nothing unconstitutional or illegal happened to you and fair is where you go on rides and eat cotton candy. You've got nowhere to go with this. Understand now?
  12. 1 point
    pg1067

    No will and probate

    Well...I suspect your friends are not lawyers and have no working knowledge of the laws of Iowa or any other state. I'd be awfully curious to know why they think this might happen. Anyway... There are basically three ways that a piece of real property might "go to the state" after the owner of the property dies (maybe someone else will think of another that I'm not thinking of). The first involves failure to pay property taxes, but that's not limited to situations involving dead people, and the property doesn't really "go to the state." Rather, the property is auctioned off (typically by the county, not the state). The second involves situations in which a person dies and has no close relatives, in which case the property will escheat to the state. This happens only very rarely. The third involves a situation in which a person owes money to the state and the state sues, gets a judgment and enforces the judgment against the property. Again, this isn't limited to dead people and would involve an auction, so the property doesn't really "go to the state." This is also extremely uncommon.
  13. 1 point
    KMG

    Neighbor suing for future rain water damages

    I want to thank you again for convincing me to call our insurance company again. They are handling the issue and so far we are extremely pleased! One of the attorneys came out to the house to take tons of photos and discuss the case. They filed a spectacular answer with a dozen defenses and requested a jury trial if the judge won't dismiss.
  14. 1 point
    Who did you call at your insurance company? I'll bet it was your agent (clueless). Any insurance person with half a brain should know that your deductible applies to damage to your property under Section I of your policy and does not apply to defending you against a lawsuit under your Section II Liability Coverage. Take out your policy papers and look for a toll free number for reporting claims. Call up and say "I am being sued. Please open a claim under my liability insurance." Then you'll be assigned a claim rep to whom you can forward the summons and complaint by fax or email. Once you get the claim rep's name and phone number, don't wait until he/she calls you. You call and keep following up. Claim reps handle hundreds of files and get 5 - 10 new ones every day. A lawsuit gets priority but he has to know about it to do something about it. Do this quickly as you typically don't have much time to file an answer.
  15. 1 point
    metoo

    parking and using my RV on my property

    After many letters and attending a board meeting the board would not give an inch on this. We asked for a compromise of maybe allowing trailers from Memorial day to Labor Day, or allowing a 48 or 72 hour rule, or some form of compromise to no avail. As far as filing as a seasonal residence I could never find the Wisconsin codes that would apply to trailers. Maybe if more people who share this dilemma contact them we might have a chance for compromise.
  16. 1 point
    Why "must" there be something like this? And what makes you think the presence of the motor home is "interfering" with the OP in any way. The original post certainly doesn't say anything like that. First, isn't that exactly what's happening here? Second, any law that prohibits parking a motor home in the street for longer than X days is a local law, not a state law.
  17. 1 point
    Please articulate exactly what this means. What "easement." Who has an easement over your neighbor's property? Never heard of such a thing as a "tertiary law." Are you sure that's what you meant to type? Why would you think there would be a law making it illegal for a property owner to allow a guest to use the property? "Has to look"? What makes you believe you are under any obligation to look? So...you're jealous? You didn't ask a question, so I'm unsure what the point of your post is. Nothing you've described suggests anything illegal is occurring. It's possible that the arrangement is violating some local zoning law, but we obviously have no way of knowing about that since you didn't identify your locality.
  18. 1 point
    Other than asking him to turn off his porch light earlier, to which he is free to say No, I ask again, in what way is this hurting him?
  19. 1 point
    Hi all, Metoo... I totally agree with you. We've been in Waushara for 60+ years seasonally, and past 20 year round, and I do NOT understand the seasonal RV zoning AT ALL. It's overly restrictive and unintelligible. Can you elaborate on what happend with Waushara Board when you applied for "seasonal" or "unclassified" permit? You said they said no... will u add some more detail here? about what happened in your case?, bc we will probably have to try to do the same, and need all the help we can get with all we're facing! We too are wondering about an RV as seasonal use in Waushara under whatever the requirements of WI Uniform Dwelling Code are (but I'm not finding them), for a variety of very significant hardship issues, including elderly age--can't rebuild, and other conditions. I am an attorney and I will apply/petition for unclassified or conditional use, given our circumstances. We have a heated building on 2.5 acres, so the zoning/land use ordinance is very unclear. Arguably, we can use RV connected seasonally, then store it bc it's within 300', but I don't understand the OP's issues with leaving it connected to utilities unoccupied? I just don't get it... if you're building or converting structure to dwelling, then u should be able to leave RV connected, under cond. use permit? Makes no sense that you'd have to disconnect if you're just gone a week. If any one has anything to add in experience with Waushara Board of Adjustments, please do comment. Thank you.
  20. 1 point
    metoo

    parking and using my RV on my property

    We have the same problem. We use our trailer for summer camping. We would go home for 2-3 days where it was unattended. We keep the property neat, grass cut, not junk or garbage. Someone also turned us in. I checked with some of the surrounding counties and found that Winnegago county lets you leave them for 72 hours, Portage county for 6 months, and Marquette county no limit between April 16 to November 30. We tried the seasonal residence also with the board and they said no. I really believe they need to revisit their statutes regarding this. When we are up there we buy all our groceries, liquor, supplies, etc locally. We go the Hancock every year for the labor day celebration and enjoy donating to their firefighters funds. I understand they don't want run down trailers being left all around the county, but think a modified regulation that eases how long you can leave it up especially during the summer months could be helpful to all. If you already have a resolution I would love to know how it turned out. Thanks
  21. 0 points
    anniedorris76

    Wrong place wrong time.

    You all can go to hell you dont know me
  22. -1 points
    why doesnt ANYONE read what I say? I did NOT SAY anything about freedom of speech being the MAIN issue... I said IF A BUSINESS ALLOWS APPEALS, DOES THAT INVOKE DUE PROCESS? And there are PLENTY of examples of the constitution effecting businesses!
  23. -1 points
  24. -1 points
    so, if a business fires you and they have an appeals process, they can just deny your appeal with NO procedural due process in place or sense of legal fairness? Are ANY of you guys attorneys????
  25. -1 points
    stebbinsd

    Private arbitration unconstitutional?

    Also ... I did not suggest that solution. Re-read my OP. I said we could solve this problem simply by requiring arbitrations to be state-owned and financed, with state-mandated monopolies on arbitration services. Stop putting words in my mouth.
×