It may take great effort to evict a tenant but the horses could be made to leave at the end of the month. That would have been the best play. Horses removed July 31st.
6 Likes
What known psychiatric issues? Depression? I may not be remembering some info about him correctly, because all I remember is depression and therapy.
Holy shinoly…if people stop renting to people that have taken an antidepressant, the homelessness is about to explode.
16 Likes
Silly me, I interpreted “negotiating for his own release” by “testifying for MB “in exchange for a job opportunity”, as raising the possibility of MB giving RG employment.
But now that you’ve clarified, to the extent that you were discussing MB obtaining employment for RG, it was only via networking.
Which I had previously explained.
9 Likes
No idea, honestly. All I remember is as you said - depression.
Can you imagine? Even more so since he was a partner in SGF. Was he supposed to tell himself not to be a partner in SGF because he suffered from depression? I don’t know how that’s going to work out, honestly. But yes - that would cause homelessness to explode if it was allowed to venture down that road when entering into leases.
8 Likes
His psychiatric experts testified to CPTSD, and possible childhood abuse, as well as a history of depression.
You’re right that diagnoses of depression are very common.
Renting a house for oneself and renting a business facility involving lots of clients including children are two different things. I assume that the issue will be whether SGF knew or should have known that MB was at risk of a mental break.
The plaintiffs lawyers have to attempt to pin liability wherever they can; especially to parties with deep pockets. SGF qualifies as having deep pockets, assuming they had liability coverage.
MB was a part of SGF. You are effectively asking if he should have not formed a business with himself or should have foreseen his own future mental state given all possible future circumstances and advised himself not to do business with…himself.
I hope you are aware of how ridiculous that sounds.
38 Likes
Exactly. MB served notice of eviction on Aug 6 and shot her on Aug 7.
Way to miss my point entirely. Well done!
26 Likes
The horses should have been made to remove from the facility. So this part is a cautionary tale.
6 Likes
She was verbally told much earlier as evidenced by her father negotiating moving to another place and even before that. An eviction notification may be made verbally. For normal people, they get it and leave.
20 Likes
Yeah, there was testimony she was told to leave in April. Normal people leave. They don’t plant hidden recorders and cameras, among other things. And when they get written notice,they don’t go see how they can bring inspectors out and get Michael booted instead. On his own property. Etc…
26 Likes
Michael Barisone, Michael Barisone Dressage, and SGF are are distinct legal entities.
SGF probably has significant liability insurance. It is my impression that juries are much more willing to make a big judgement against an insurance company or a large corporation than against a human being.
Whether or not it’s ridiculous that the plaintiff is arguing that SGF (which includes MB as a partner) should have known he was at risk of a mental break or not, I can definitely see why SGF is a defendant.
SGF has a cross complaint against MB, also despite his being a partner. Do you consider it ridiculous that he, as SGF, is suing himself?
Keep on repeating this, time and time again, even after we’ve talked about that indemnification waiver, more than once. Maybe it will come true.
Again, we’ve discussed this more than once. SGF’s cross claim against MB is because they are saying SGF has no liability (see aforementioned Indemnification waiver) - the liability belongs to MB individually.
They aren’t suing him. We’ve seriously talked about this more than once.
29 Likes
Should I try offering reading glasses again?
Hey, maybe Jonathan Kanarek needs new reading glasses too. Maybe that is why he did not respond to the subpoena?
Loaner reading glasses helped RG during the trial.
11 Likes
Not really, but Michael Barisone, the person, is a member of SGF, the corporation. SGF, the corporation, is crossclaiming to sever their liability, as a corporation, from the liability of Michael Barisone, as a person. He, as a member of the corporation, is protected as an owner of the corporation from personal liability against the negligence of the corporation. That is completely independent from his personal liability, and also has nothing to do with insurance.
Your lack of legal understanding is profound in so many cases.
39 Likes
Not that I heard. There was testimony that MHG made it clear that she, MHG, wanted LK gone as early as April.
But LK was training with Barisone. I saw no testimony that Barisone requested she leave prior to Aug 5/6.
1 Like
Other than LK’s and RG’s claims, there is not one smidgeon of proof that MB shot her. You cling to this like a fly to flypaper.
27 Likes
I think yes!
2 Likes
It is creepy that you think MHG asking LK to leave is an excuse for LK not to realize she had to go. It was a valid request to vacate.
It’s shady to say MHG didn’t represent MBs wishes as if she’d gone rogue.
The bigger question then must be why someone would insist on staying where they weren’t wanted. Did they think MB/MHG would change their mind?
Again all this comes out in the civil case and I’m positive the jury will be shocked by it.
17 Likes
