1/ made the mistake of reading neighborhood news on Facebook. story #1: the planning board has approved the construction of an Aubuchon Hardware store reactions include: * "I have it from someone who knows that it's going to be a Dollar General" [ ...ignoring the link ]
-
-
10/ from what I can tell, ownership of the land changed hands squatter says "I had a verbal agreement with the dead man", new owner says "I've got no evidence of that", judge asks "any further data?", squatter screams and drops f bombshttps://twitter.com/KarlKGallagher/status/1421114393870413825 …
Show this thread -
11/ adverse possession has to be actual, open and notorious, exclusive, adverse and continuous adverse means "without permission" so if he had permission, not adverse, so no A.P. if he didn't, he's a squatter...and it doesn't seem to be "open"https://twitter.com/TheClarksTale/status/1421116959031128067 …
Show this thread -
12/ further, article seems to say that building codes are also in play, and non profits were willing to work w the squatter to get utilities connected, but he refused so,,,
Show this thread -
13/ This approach "let's trust what he says. If X is true, then he is hoisted on petard Y ; if S is true, then petard T" is exactly like
#BarnLaw >>>https://twitter.com/WhippleMarc/status/1421124150765182980 …Show this thread -
14/ multiple examples: * Zoning board chair says that he read my memo in objection to variance in full. If he did, then he knows that there's a Cease and Desist, and the variance can't be granted bc "personal circumstances". If he was lying, then he was derelict in his duty.
Show this thread -
15/ * variance applicant said in court that there were other places he could have put the structure. If this is true, then he can't get a variance, because of “other reasonably feasible methods” sub prong of the hardship prong. If, OTOH, he lied, then he perjured himself.
Show this thread -
16/ next zoning board meeting is on Tuesday three outcomes that I see: * variance denied (super unlikely) * variance approved (we immediately sue to overturn) * application rejected for rework (most likely, IMO, bc the application is laugable)https://twitter.com/rog_thronhill/status/1421121353021890560 …
Show this thread -
17/ "Application returned for rework" is most annoying, because it stretches out the timeline for another 6 months or something ... and is unfair, as I TOLD ZBA 9 months ago exactly how the application was defective, and yet the rejection would give him a 2nd bite at the apple
Show this thread -
18/ My atty and I are in agreement that if the ZBA returns the application for rework, we sue immediately for summary judgement (I think that's the term) because there is no possible way a variance can legally be granted, and this charade has gone on long enough.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Impression I get from article is owner didn't mind squatter until he had to pay taxes on the cabin. Might be a case for adverse possession, but then squatter would jailed for not paying taxes. :(
-
Squatter would likely not be jailed for tax nonpayment, just fined & a tax lien placed.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.