Exactly!
4 Likes
It wouldn’t be taking possession of the horse. It would be initially changing its location. A stable man’s lien is to get ownership of the property. That’s not what was wanted.
Nor is he seizing it. He is excluding it from one area to another and not providing services. As it’s the end of the month those services as of Sept 1 have not been paid for.
7 Likes
It seems completely relevant that he had first asked her to leave that day, Aug 5, as opposed to months or weeks earlier. He referred to them as “squatters” in one of the 911 calls. If he had served a notice to vacate months prior to Aug 5, they would be there in violation of the eviction process. Since he hadn’t served a notice to vacate prior to Aug 5, they were still legal tenants while he was calling 911 and referring to them as squatters. Delusional.
1 Like
Maybe (stick with me here) he called them squatters the way a big wide swath of the general public uses that term: people who aren’t paying rent, who have worn out their welcome, and won’t leave when you ask them to.
It’s delusional to think Lauren didn’t know she’d been asked to leave, yes.
27 Likes
I’m not a lawyer, but that doesn’t make me clueless about law.
What else am I (also) clueless about, according to you?
No lease. No contract. Previous verbal mandates to leave.
You keep insisting things that aren’t true. Eviction warning does not have to be just in writing.
But again who stays where they are unwanted? From APRIL. Just take horses and GO with all the multiple offers I saw given her on FB.
17 Likes
He should have evicted her. She should have left. She should not have harassed him, stalked him, tormented him, recorded his private conversations, snooped in his office, filed false accusations against him with SafeSport, reported him to town authorities for code violations resulting from work her manservant had done, hinted that she intended to destroy him, and so on and so on - including the very real possibility that she and/or her manservant instigated the scuffle that led to the discharge of the firearm. She should not have gotten shot. He should not have been beaten so severely he suffered head trauma and amnesia.
There, I fixed it for you.
45 Likes
Eviction law for one.
19 Likes
I looked into it further, in NJ the stableman’s lien is automatic and gives the facility owner (or anyone with a financial relationship to the horse’s owner) to retain until the indebtedness is discharged. However, that would be for indebtedness due to board - not for the tenancy of the house.
However, presuming the board had been paid for August, I am not clear how terminating anything on Sept 1 would have changed any of the outcomes that occurred? Unless I am not following you properly.
3 Likes
Interesting compare and contrast with mommy.
6 Likes
She would have to care for and provide for the horses herself. To begin with.
4 Likes
As you well know, one can be a legal tenant without a written lease.
1 Like
LOL I was assuming “eviction law” was included as part of “law”.
More cluelessness, I guess.
1 Like
In NJ without a lease certain protections are removed.
There is a provision for a 3 day written notice which is probably what was served. Certainly the circumstances fulfill the provisions.
And the civil jury will hear all of this too.
8 Likes
In fact I dare say ALL of these apply.
9 Likes
If she was served a three day notice to quit on the 5th, it makes it even more tragic and insane that he shot her on the 7th.
1 Like
I think CH has shown a significant understanding of the law and ability to question and comprehend complex issues in her correspondence with lawyers here.
MB served notice of eviction on Aug 6. She was shot during a scuffle with MB on Aug 7.
Fixed this one, too.
19 Likes
Before anyone says I’m saying anything else, NO I am not saying I think Lauren ending up with bullet wounds was justified or should have happened, or anything of the sort. I agree it’s tragic the situation boiled to this point.
I just want to point out - she wasn’t going anywhere. That’s the point of the timeline. She got the notice on the 5th. And, what was her testimony she was doing on the 7th? Packing? Calling around looking for barns? Putting out a shout out for help moving? (All while her dad had moved out of negotiations and had hired an attorney to represent her in the eviction “matter” as he phrased it.)
Nope, she was lounging on the porch with either a book, a tablet, or her phone, or all three, depending on which LK statement we are referring to, while instructing RG to “Finish The Bastard.”
She wasn’t leaving.
39 Likes
Mr T emailed the first one on the 5th.
10 Likes
