Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LexBaird
That's fraud, not civil rights.

That's my point. This isn't a civil rights issue, it's more tied to the enforcement of a contract, and other business related legal issues (which start to get out of my realm; I apologize).

152 posted on 08/11/2005 5:01:32 PM PDT by mhking (The world needs a wake up call gentlemen...we're gonna phone it in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies ]


To: mhking
That's my point. This isn't a civil rights issue, it's more tied to the enforcement of a contract, and other business related legal issues

Well, then, we agree.

But the case was a discrimination case, not a breach of contract case. One is citizen vs citizen, the other citizen vs. Govt.

159 posted on 08/11/2005 5:30:17 PM PDT by LexBaird (tyrannosaurus Lex, unapologetic carnivore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: mhking
This is an excerpt of the lawsuit filed. It was posted here but deleted, I assume, because it contained personal information that is a no no here at FR as per Jim.
 
There were 117 persons in attendance at the Family Reunion; eighty-two of the attendees leased units at Baytree III. 
 
On July 12, 2001, the opening day of the Turner-Gray Family Reunion, attendees gathered in the gazebo area of Baytree III for a welcome reception. Kevin Kennedy, an employee and representative of NMB Property Management, had authorized the gathering.
 
As the gazebo is located next to Baytree III's pool, several adults and children used the pool during the gathering.  On the evening of July 12, 2001, Defendant Jenkins approached Plaintiff Gloria Turner, who was serving as one of the organizers of the Family Reunion, and informed her that there were too many people in the pool. Defendant Jenkins directed Ms. Turner's attention to a sign posted by the pool, which indicated that occupancy of the pool was limited to 15 persons at a time.
 
Ms. Turner had been unaware of the pool's occupancy limits. Once her attention was directed to the posted sign, however, Ms. Turner assured Defendant Jenkins that all attendees of the reunion would abide by the pool rules for the remainder of the weekend. For the remainder of that evening, adult attendees of the reunion carefully monitored the number of persons in the pool to ensure that occupancy of the pool did not exceed the posted limits. Furthermore, although the pool was open until 10:00 p.m., all members of the Turner-Gray Family had vacated the pool area by 7:30 p.m.
 
Plaintiff Gloria Turner personally inspected the pool area and disposed of any paper or trash left by the members of her group. Plaintiff Gloria Turner subsequently ran into Defendant Jenkins as he was walking his dog. She informed him that everyone had left the pool and that the entire pool and gazebo area had been cleaned.
 
Defendant Jenkins replied, "This is a residential community, and people go to work and expect to come home to a quiet environment. And, you look up and the whole nation is here." When Ms. Turner questioned Defendant Jenkins as to what he meant by "Nation",  Defendant Jenkins did not respond. (emphasis added)
 
Well this explains everything to me and should answer the question as to whether or not the Reunion participants were abusing the priveledge.The guy was a bigot, pure and simple. Hope it costs him and his company dearly. They certainly deserve it.
 

176 posted on 08/11/2005 8:15:42 PM PDT by Allosaurs_r_us (I can't use the cell phone in the car. I have to keep my hands free for making obscene gestures)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson