Isn’t doing something “not pursuant to the terms of a lease” violating a lease?
I did not use quote marks, hence was not representing that I was quoting from the document.
I agree. SGF did not agree for them to live on the property, MB did. They’re saying his doing so was “not pursuant” to his lease of the facility from SGF.
[quote=“CurrentlyHorseless, post:122, topic:775980, full:true”]
If the lawyers wished to say violating, they would have said violating.
You used the word “violating” multiple times, even after being advised that that was an incorrect representation. I can only wonder why.
38 Likes
Thank you KM.
Are they in contempt for not producing documents/showing up in August or do they have until the September 9th date?
2 Likes
It reads to me that the part of the lease that was non pursuant was that it was a verbal agreement. Not that he agreed to board/train her horses. He was boarding/training a lot of other people’s horses on that farm. And clearly a lot of other people were living there as well.
ETA: and accepted alternative forms of payment than $
8 Likes
Nah, no way LK would have prayed for us to find our better selves 14K times!
18 Likes
We’ll find out on Sept 9th what the court is going to rule, unless they file anything here really soon.
4 Likes
[quote=“StB.YM, post:124, topic:775980, full:true”]
I’m not a lawyer. I don’t write in legalize when posting on an internet forum.
My nonlawyer interpretation of the filing is that SGF is saying that when MB made a “verbal barter agreement” with LK and RG, that his doing so was in violation of his agreement leasing the facility from SGF.
Hence this mess is of Barisone’s making and SGF should not be held liable for a mess of Barisone’s making.
I don’t think so…[La-LaPoprider] would never have been able to resist reverting to her usual style when pushed. Seeker just seemed too [edit], with none of the devious or outlandish behavior.
16 Likes
Nope, not after the way she reacted to being told Jesus loves you on YT and FB.
7 Likes
In the context of the entire document, that’s not what they’re saying though.
18 Likes
[quote=“CurrentlyHorseless, post:129, topic:775980”]
Ok, thank you for explaining that it was your interpretation.
2 Likes
Slightly OT, what happened to Seeker? Did she simply stop posting?
3 Likes
Would the wording/terms of the LLC absolve the elder SGF partners from any liability caused by MB?
2 Likes
So, in their answer to the original suit, their cross-claim says they have an indemnification waiver from MB and MB Dressage that agrees to hold SGF harmless from any acts that arise out of the business of MB Dressage or MB personally. That’s their out.
In the meantime, they are trying to prove they owed no duty of care to LK because she was “nothing more than a trespasser” and also that LK and RG caused the events that happened on Aug 7th, as evidenced by the verdict in the jury trial.
27 Likes
Apparently the original subpoena made her scurry away and take our advice to stop with the public posts. Many of us told her publically admitting to seeing, hearing, transcribing the illegal recordings was not a good idea.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first start to deceive.
I predict this will not end well for the Kanarek family, just as I predicted Michael would be found not guilty!
Edited to add there are others who apparently had possession of one or more of those illegal tapes. Will they be subpoenaed as well I wonder?
26 Likes
They said the lease for MB Dressage was crude, it is entirely possible the LLC was just as crude and left legal gaps somewhere.
6 Likes
I believe they are currently not in compliance and the Sept 9th date is for the judge to declare them in Contempt and to assign punishment.
11 Likes
5 Likes
I just bet she is twirling around in a bit of a fit seeing that in writing.
5 Likes
