A couple of the guys have corrected my statement about tort damages...and I
should have explained further by explaining that a neighbor persistently
pestered the city attorney until the city attorney called me and threatened me
with tort damages if I did not remove the tower. The neighbor since moved,
and we also have a new city attorney. The tower is still up.
Geo W7LFD
-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-admin@contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-admin@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Chris BONDE
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 4:07 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: RE: [Towertalk] deed restrictions
Torts are good. The law is that you can only have one tort before supper.
(mama's law.)
Sorry, :+})
Chris opr VE7HCB
At 12:35 PM 2002-03-18 -0700, Stu Greene wrote:
>At 11:15 AM 3/18/02 -0800, Geo Clute W7LFD wrote:
>>Joe, I believe you've missed the point. CC&R's being a contractual
>>arrangement between buyer/seller is enforced by the tort laws of the
>>U.S. Now those tort laws make no distinctions between the Bill
>>Of Rights and the contract signed.
>
>This is why this discussion should appear on the Ham Law Reflector. CC&Rs
>are interpreted and adjudicated under basic contract and real property law.
>
>Torts are civil wrongs, such as libel and slander, assault and battery and
>the like. Violations of CC&Rs are not torts. In essence they are
>breaches of contracts.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Towertalk mailing list
>Towertalk@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
Towertalk mailing list
Towertalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|