Updated barisone lawsuit 10/29/21 post 851

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@trubandloki

As I read this (and the other) discussion(s) on this topic I often wonder how different this part of the world would be If LK’s father put half the energy into helping LK learn about being a person who better fits into society and less time making excuses and fixing the mayhem.

On the whole topic of - how dare you site the local laws about contractors, they are racist and prevent day laborers from working - Let us ignore the whole fact that all laws make something difficult for someone.
I believe the point of laws like that is to provide protection for the consumer. One of the most important parts of laws like that is the requirement for insurance.
Day laborers are not restricted from working for/under a licenses contractor, so the day laborers can still work, while their boss has a license and insurance.
And the day laborer spewing does not really apply in this case anyway. No one drives down to the corner and asks the waiting day laborers if any of them do drywall and electrical wiring.

Re immigrant day laborers or immigrant workers in general, if a licensed contractor boss hires an undocumented worker, in some states the boss has committed a criminal offense. It’s easier for the state to monitor and punish the person doing the hiring than the undocumented worker. So I think IM is correct on the effect of overly restrictive regulations on contracting on undocumented workers.

I’m not a home owner or even condo owner, so I have no personal experience with hiring licensed or unlicensed dry wall hangers. I understand the rationale for the state to require licensing for technical trades like plumbing and electric, since shoddy work in those areas can kill people. But I was honestly surprised by the long list of trades that require licensing posted by KM. Drywall hanging wasn’t on it, but “painting” and “moving” were!

I moved apartments three times in four years in college and never once hired a licensed mover. I now find out that the DIY move with the help of your friends is illegal.

To bring this around to horse issues, I imagine most states require a horse hauler to be licensed, if they require movers of household goods to be licensed. All those times in my youth when I relied on the kindness of friends to haul my horse to a show, was I committing a crime? Was the generous owner of the truck and trailer committing a crime?

Let’s not get distracted by searching the web for state laws on hauling someone else’s horse without a license. I’m just saying that I’d guess that the legal restrictions on hauling horses are probably at least as serious as the legal restrictions on hanging drywall.

Will I in the future hire only licensed horse haulers, movers and painters? Unfortunately, having been educated by KM that the vastly cheaper DIY approach is a violation of the law, I no longer have the excuse that I didn’t know better.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

As I read this (and the other) discussion(s) on this topic I often wonder how different this part of the world would be If LK’s father put half the energy into helping LK learn about being a person who better fits into society and less time making excuses and fixing the mayhem.

On the whole topic of - how dare you site the local laws about contractors, they are racist and prevent day laborers from working - Let us ignore the whole fact that all laws make something difficult for someone.
I believe the point of laws like that is to provide protection for the consumer. One of the most important parts of laws like that is the requirement for insurance.
Day laborers are not restricted from working for/under a licenses contractor, so the day laborers can still work, while their boss has a license and insurance.
And the day laborer spewing does not really apply in this case anyway. No one drives down to the corner and asks the waiting day laborers if any of them do drywall and electrical wiring.

Re immigrant day laborers or immigrant workers in general, if a licensed contractor boss hires an undocumented worker, in some states the boss has committed a criminal offense. It’s easier for the state to monitor and punish the person doing the hiring than the undocumented worker. So I think IM is correct on the effect of overly restrictive regulations on contracting on undocumented workers.

I’m not a home owner or even condo owner, so I have no personal experience with hiring licensed or unlicensed dry wall hangers. I understand the rationale for the state to require licensing for technical trades like plumbing and electric, since shoddy work in those areas can kill people. But I was honestly surprised by the long list of trades that require licensing posted by KM. Drywall hanging wasn’t on it, but “painting” and “moving” were!

I moved apartments three times in four years in college and never once hired a licensed mover. I now find out that the DIY move with the help of your friends is illegal.

To bring this around to horse issues, I imagine most states require a horse hauler to be licensed, if they require movers of household goods to be licensed. All those times in my youth when I relied on the kindness of friends to haul my horse to a show, was I committing a crime? Was the generous owner of the truck and trailer committing a crime?

Let’s not get distracted by searching the web for state laws on hauling someone else’s horse without a license. I’m just saying that I’d guess that the legal restrictions on hauling horses are probably at least as serious as the legal restrictions on hanging drywall.

Will I in the future hire only licensed horse haulers, movers and painters? Unfortunately, having been educated by KM that the vastly cheaper DIY approach is a violation of the law, I no longer have the excuse that I didn’t know better.

IM inserting the immigrant mumbo jumbo was to deflect from the fact that I clearly showed that even to hang just ONLY drywall (as if), a license is required in NJ and IM’s only possible response or come back was to deflect to another issue such as illegal aliens/immigrants. There is no other defense to the assertion that legally not only was the $50,000 not “technically owed” but was, in itself an issue that could cause the alleged payee significant financial and legal issues. And that is why they didnt sue for the money.

[Incantation]

Did you pay your friends to help you move, or to haul your horse?

Here permits are required for work over a certain $$ amount. Under that, for may things, an unlicensed handyman can be hired.

[cutter99]

If you pay someone to haul your horse, yes, that can throw the hauler into a commercial category. Just ask your insurance company or check with state or federal departments of transportation.

Not only are you expected to have a certain education for commercial hauling, but you also must have a commercial license and insurance.

This is why I do not haul for others!

[Angela_Freda]

Same here in NY, NJ and PA I believe.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

As I read this (and the other) discussion(s) on this topic I often wonder how different this part of the world would be If LK’s father put half the energy into helping LK learn about being a person who better fits into society and less time making excuses and fixing the mayhem.

On the whole topic of - how dare you site the local laws about contractors, they are racist and prevent day laborers from working - Let us ignore the whole fact that all laws make something difficult for someone.
I believe the point of laws like that is to provide protection for the consumer. One of the most important parts of laws like that is the requirement for insurance.
Day laborers are not restricted from working for/under a licenses contractor, so the day laborers can still work, while their boss has a license and insurance.
And the day laborer spewing does not really apply in this case anyway. No one drives down to the corner and asks the waiting day laborers if any of them do drywall and electrical wiring.

Re immigrant day laborers or immigrant workers in general, if a licensed contractor boss hires an undocumented worker, in some states the boss has committed a criminal offense. It’s easier for the state to monitor and punish the person doing the hiring than the undocumented worker. So I think IM is correct on the effect of overly restrictive regulations on contracting on undocumented workers.

I’m not a home owner or even condo owner, so I have no personal experience with hiring licensed or unlicensed dry wall hangers. I understand the rationale for the state to require licensing for technical trades like plumbing and electric, since shoddy work in those areas can kill people. But I was honestly surprised by the long list of trades that require licensing posted by KM. Drywall hanging wasn’t on it, but “painting” and “moving” were!

I moved apartments three times in four years in college and never once hired a licensed mover. I now find out that the DIY move with the help of your friends is illegal.

To bring this around to horse issues, I imagine most states require a horse hauler to be licensed, if they require movers of household goods to be licensed. All those times in my youth when I relied on the kindness of friends to haul my horse to a show, was I committing a crime? Was the generous owner of the truck and trailer committing a crime?

Let’s not get distracted by searching the web for state laws on hauling someone else’s horse without a license. I’m just saying that I’d guess that the legal restrictions on hauling horses are probably at least as serious as the legal restrictions on hanging drywall.

Will I in the future hire only licensed horse haulers, movers and painters? Unfortunately, having been educated by KM that the vastly cheaper DIY approach is a violation of the law, I no longer have the excuse that I didn’t know better.

IM inserting the immigrant mumbo jumbo was to deflect from the fact that I clearly showed that even to hang just ONLY drywall (as if), a license is required in NJ and IM’s only possible response or come back was to deflect to another issue such as illegal aliens/immigrants. There is no other defense to the assertion that legally not only was the $50,000 not “technically owed” but was, in itself an issue that could cause the alleged payee significant financial and legal issues. And that is why they didnt sue for the money.

Here is the only reason I have any interest at all in the technical legality or illegality of hanging drying without a license in NJ.

IM makes lots of extremely interesting and pertinent statements of fact. I don’t automatically believe what he is saying is true, but I think it might be, and therefore I read his posts very carefully to see if they are contradicted by known facts. So far, I have seen no obvious contradictions, but that’s in large part that’s because there are so few known facts, right?

He stated that one of the factors in LK not moving prior to Aug 7 was that RG was owed over $50,000 for “work”, and further that Sweetgrass had acknowledged the debt. Do I believe that SG acknowledged in writing that RG was owed $50,000? TBH I’m not sure. You probably don’t believe it.

At the time he asserted that it was not illegal to hire a couple college kids to hang drywall (I took this to be just an example), I thought that statement was probably true, since I’ve used “college kid” labor for moving several times, and had no idea that doing so violated any laws. Your posts did change my mind on the technical illegality of using unlicensed movers, painters, and horse haulers. But, TBH, I don’t appreciate being informed on that score, since I will probably continue with the unlicensed version of those jobs, and can no longer claim ignorance.

[CurrentlyHorseless]

@cutter99

If you pay someone to haul your horse, yes, that can throw the hauler into a commercial category. Just ask your insurance company or check with state or federal departments of transportation.

Not only are you expected to have a certain education for commercial hauling, but you also must have a commercial license and insurance.

This is why I do not haul for others!

I’m not talking about hauling with a semi that requires a CDL. I’m talking about friends who have a regular drivers license, regular vehicle insurance, a F150 and a two horse trailer. Is the friend violating the law by hauling a horse to a show and I insist on paying for gas?

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Knights_Mom

@CurrentlyHorseless

@trubandloki

As I read this (and the other) discussion(s) on this topic I often wonder how different this part of the world would be If LK’s father put half the energy into helping LK learn about being a person who better fits into society and less time making excuses and fixing the mayhem.

On the whole topic of - how dare you site the local laws about contractors, they are racist and prevent day laborers from working - Let us ignore the whole fact that all laws make something difficult for someone.
I believe the point of laws like that is to provide protection for the consumer. One of the most important parts of laws like that is the requirement for insurance.
Day laborers are not restricted from working for/under a licenses contractor, so the day laborers can still work, while their boss has a license and insurance.
And the day laborer spewing does not really apply in this case anyway. No one drives down to the corner and asks the waiting day laborers if any of them do drywall and electrical wiring.

Re immigrant day laborers or immigrant workers in general, if a licensed contractor boss hires an undocumented worker, in some states the boss has committed a criminal offense. It’s easier for the state to monitor and punish the person doing the hiring than the undocumented worker. So I think IM is correct on the effect of overly restrictive regulations on contracting on undocumented workers.

I’m not a home owner or even condo owner, so I have no personal experience with hiring licensed or unlicensed dry wall hangers. I understand the rationale for the state to require licensing for technical trades like plumbing and electric, since shoddy work in those areas can kill people. But I was honestly surprised by the long list of trades that require licensing posted by KM. Drywall hanging wasn’t on it, but “painting” and “moving” were!

I moved apartments three times in four years in college and never once hired a licensed mover. I now find out that the DIY move with the help of your friends is illegal.

To bring this around to horse issues, I imagine most states require a horse hauler to be licensed, if they require movers of household goods to be licensed. All those times in my youth when I relied on the kindness of friends to haul my horse to a show, was I committing a crime? Was the generous owner of the truck and trailer committing a crime?

Let’s not get distracted by searching the web for state laws on hauling someone else’s horse without a license. I’m just saying that I’d guess that the legal restrictions on hauling horses are probably at least as serious as the legal restrictions on hanging drywall.

Will I in the future hire only licensed horse haulers, movers and painters? Unfortunately, having been educated by KM that the vastly cheaper DIY approach is a violation of the law, I no longer have the excuse that I didn’t know better.

IM inserting the immigrant mumbo jumbo was to deflect from the fact that I clearly showed that even to hang just ONLY drywall (as if), a license is required in NJ and IM’s only possible response or come back was to deflect to another issue such as illegal aliens/immigrants. There is no other defense to the assertion that legally not only was the $50,000 not “technically owed” but was, in itself an issue that could cause the alleged payee significant financial and legal issues. And that is why they didnt sue for the money.

Here is the only reason I have any interest at all in the technical legality or illegality of hanging drying without a license in NJ.

IM makes lots of extremely interesting and pertinent statements of fact. I don’t automatically believe what he is saying is true, but I think it might be, and therefore I read his posts very carefully to see if they are contradicted by known facts. So far, I have seen no obvious contradictions, but that’s in large part that’s because there are so few known facts, right?

He stated that one of the factors in LK not moving prior to Aug 7 was that RG was owed over $50,000 for “work”, and further that Sweetgrass had acknowledged the debt. Do I believe that SG acknowledged in writing that RG was owed $50,000? TBH I’m not sure. You probably don’t believe it.

At the time he asserted that it was not illegal to hire a couple college kids to hang drywall (I took this to be just an example), I thought that statement was probably true, since I’ve used “college kid” labor for moving several times, and had no idea that doing so violated any laws. Your posts did change my mind on the technical illegality of using unlicensed movers, painters, and horse haulers. But, TBH, I don’t appreciate being informed on that score, since I will probably continue with the unlicensed version of those jobs, and can no longer claim ignorance.

Ok. To each their own. My personal concern would be in obtaining an insurance claim should the work done by an unlicensed contractor prove problematic.

One would hope grandma wouldn’t sue if a piece of drywall fell on her while she slept. One would hope unlicensed work wouldn’t cause a fire either by shoddy work or purely by chance should it have been done by an unlicensed contractor. Would insurance still pay a claim? Would you be found liable by virtue of negligence for grandma being splatted?

Nobody, but nobody, wants to clean up grandma splat.

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@cutter99

If you pay someone to haul your horse, yes, that can throw the hauler into a commercial category. Just ask your insurance company or check with state or federal departments of transportation.

Not only are you expected to have a certain education for commercial hauling, but you also must have a commercial license and insurance.

This is why I do not haul for others!

I’m not talking about hauling with a semi that requires a CDL. I’m talking about friends who have a regular drivers license, regular vehicle insurance, a F150 and a two horse trailer. Is the friend violating the law by hauling a horse to a show and I insist on paying for gas?

They didn’t pay anything. You were hauling them as a friendship favor.

The gas money they gave you was for doing Xmas shopping.

[Ghazzu]

@CurrentlyHorseless

I’m not talking about hauling with a semi that requires a CDL. I’m talking about friends who have a regular drivers license, regular vehicle insurance, a F150 and a two horse trailer. Is the friend violating the law by hauling a horse to a show and I insist on paying for gas?

IANAL, but probably technically yes.
Is it rigorously enforced? No.

[MorganSercu]

I don’t know your age, but when I was a kid, that wasn’t breaking any law that I can recall.

[CanteringCarrot]

@MHM

@seahorse

MB had a large standing safe in his office, the safe had many firearms in it.
He was experienced with guns.

If that’s the case, and his intention was actually to shoot them and kill them, it seems even more odd that he did such a poor job of it.

I’m still amazed by the number of people who think they know exactly what happened that day before hearing any of the evidence presented at the trial.

Was if a poor job though? I mean, he didn’t kill anyone, but I think LK was very lucky to survive.

I mean, perhaps you’re not wrong here, but I think it was a bit of luck that the shots to LK weren’t fatal. Just a perspective there.

Who, aside from one person (IM) has said they know everything or exactly what happened? I think there is a general consensus here that the rest of us are just speculating, tossing around “what ifs” and visiting varying perspectives.

[CanteringCarrot]

@Angela_Freda

@CanteringCarrot

Hm. Did LK’s actions bring this about? Perhaps, but the whole story is all over the place. However, MB was the one who had a gun and pulled the trigger. He shot at two people with the intention to kill them. No matter how annoying, ridiculous or crazy a person is (in your mind - or in general), you can’t just shoot them.

I’m not sure we’re certain of the bold items.
Recent comments from people “in the know” make me wonder.

Y’know, I’ve thought that before but I’m just not sure. It was also said MB admits to doing it (having the gun and firing it). I don’t think he’s denying that?

But I mean, some things do make me go “hmm…”

[eggbutt]

There is SO much that hasn’t been made public so we are are simply wading through ideas. I honestly believe EVERYONE will be surprised at what the jury hears.

[iberianfan]

In general, the statutes that require licensed contractors to perform various work are there to protect the consumer. So, for those of you that hire unlicensed workers, you are not going to get “sued”. Who would sue you? The state? Highly doubtful.

Federally, there is the Consumer Protection Act. Most states (I haven’t researched which ones, or if all of them) have enacted some form of the CPA. That is the act that permits treble damages in the case of false or misleading advertising. It exists to deter contractors (licensed or not) from promising things they cannot deliver on, etc.

If you hire an unlicensed person to do a job that, under your state law, must be done by a licensed contractor, and you are unhappy with the job and refuse to pay, the unlicensed person cannot recover from you AND may be subject to pay YOU treble damages for misleading you into hiring them, or other wrongdoing. Of course, you, the consumer, must prove damages. So, if the person did a beautiful, far above average, job, for half price, you’d be hard put to prove damages, unless the law asserts prima facie damages based upon the lack of licensing.

So, the point KM and other legal folks have been trying to make is that, if the work done by RG was not up to par, because he is unlicensed, he cannot demand payment and sue to get it. Whether SG acknowledges a debt, I seriously doubt, but have no idea, really. I wouldn’t acknowledge a debt for shoddy work.

I am not clear on what was determined to be uninhabitable: the house or the barn. Earlier, it was stated that PARTS of the house were uninhabitable; but LK seems to state it was the barn.

Anyhoo. I don’t know anyone involved in this saga. But, it seems odd that LK would call the Fire Marshall on the barn - where her horses were - to get MB evicted from the barn…It’s all just odd.

[Ghazzu]

@iberianfan

Earlier, it was stated that PARTS of the house were uninhabitable; but LK seems to state it was the barn.

IIRC, the barn bit was a code violation because it did not have a certificate of occupancy as a dwelling, so it didn’t matter if it were “safe” in terms of construction/wiring etc.
So like an “illegal” apartment.

[Knights_Mom]

@Ghazzu

@iberianfan

Earlier, it was stated that PARTS of the house were uninhabitable; but LK seems to state it was the barn.

IIRC, the barn bit was a code violation because it did not have a certificate of occupancy as a dwelling, so it didn’t matter if it were “safe” in terms of construction/wiring etc.
So like an “illegal” apartment.

So an attempt to render MB homeless or to force his dwelling back into the house?

[eggbutt]

I wonder what the outcome was LK expected? Did she and IM think MB would send MHG packing and stay at Hawthorne Hill eagerly and joyously training LK? The only PSG horse she rode for MB was his horse and she rode him poorly, so what was the expectation? There simply was not enough time to get her even on the long list for the Olympic team, much less the short list. I have always been so curious at her refusal to leave and what she truly expected the outcome to be.

IM wants us to believe he/she/it, has an inside track with the prosecution and likes to predict the failings and emotional state of the defense attorneys. If either is true it is illogical to post here, unless it is posturing for 48 Hours to sway opinions of others. Ego and public opinion is big with these folks.

[MorganSercu]

Was that in NJ or his other barn? He offered training at two, didn’t he?

Of course, just because someone has a gun safe and firearms in the past doesn’t mean they own them at present. For example, we don’t have modern firearms and no black powder for the rifles at the moment. The bullets won’t go anywhere without it.

Not pressuring you for a response, simply commenting.

[eggbutt]

Everyone in my family has a gun safe that holds important papers and valuables. Only one has ever had guns in it to my knowledge. It takes too long to open a safe if a weapon is needed IMO. That said, a gun safe is prudent at a facility with minors around. Somehow I doubt MB would have a black & pink Ruger. Why would RC be compelled to bring a weapon from NC if she knew MB had access to guns?