Their outrage has now turned into a court battle, pitting them against a man who says he has the court documents to prove the house is now his.Read more at the Daily Mail
Robert Carr moved into the home that had been occupied for 21 years, changed the locks and emptied the house.
When the family confronted Carr, he showed them a document he filed with the the County Court.
It's called a 'quiet title' and lays claim to the property because Carr says the family abandoned the house and gave up all their rights.
Sunday, December 1, 2013
"Robert Carr defies authorities and seizes ‘abandoned’ Ohio homes"
"A family Ohio were in for a nasty surprised after they returned from a visit out-of-town visit to a dying relative to find someone else had moved into their house."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
I'm betting there is far more "legal" theft happening today than the regular kind.
I'm betting there's a community organizer in the woodpile somewhere.
I'm also betting one of these "sovereign citizens" - they used to be called outlaws - is going to end up shot before long.
That was my first thought too. He'd be backing out the door with his hands up in my house.
Hire a hitman. Set some traps. Maybe he will have an unfortunate accident one of these days...hmmmm? If the government allows this to continue and these people who own the house are dispossessed .....set the damned thing on fire and hope that Mr. Carr is inside at the time.
The article implies he's "anti-government". Yeah sure. He's a criminal. He's stealing property that doesn't belong to him. That sounds more like occupy to me.
"set some traps". An excellent idea.
Doesn't look like you could give Robert Carr a black eye or a fat lip.
Usually when I see someone who "defies authorities" they are on the ground wearing cuffs with a knee in their back. Someone isn't doing their job.
One would think that the politicians of Ohio would be rushing to close this loophole immediately. Their probably too busy doing... what exactly?
It isn't clear there IS a loophole. Carr doesn't seem to be getting away with it, given that criminal charges have been filed against him.
But who is in the houses, and why would it be this guy? I don't understand the system or judges who often let the most obvious wrong party continue to harm the most obvious victim while they "review the case". Doing nothing is a decision, and in some case worse than the original offense.
Recently I was sued. The plaintiff's attorney simply sued the wrong company, and was so incompetent he didn't realize it until he had missed the statute of limitations to sue the the correct party. Everyone, including the judge, knew this was the case, and that they had no chance of prevailing against me. The judge even said as much in the first hearing, and told the attorney that he screwed up. But, what did he decide in his infinite judgemanship? To keep me on the hook for another 6 months of hearings and $40k in legal fees, so that after all that he could just repeat what he said and already knew on day one, and release me from the case. WTF?
You don't handle an obvious wrong by continuing it until you feel sure.
AllenS said...
Doesn't look like you could give Robert Carr a black eye or a fat lip.
What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Why would you think that is something worth saying?
I'll say any damned thing that I want.
A verbal knockout game.
Ignorance is Bliss said...
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
I think it was brought into the discussion when the DM article factually referred to the group they claim spearheaded this process (Sovereign something?) as "anti-black".
The important fact being that the media is working hard to blame white racists for the actions of others, as demonstrable by the race of the perpetrator.
it was brought into the discussion when the DM article factually referred to the group they claim spearheaded this process (Sovereign something?) as "anti-black".
I picked that up too, and wondered why the incongruity of the photos of the perpetrator Carr with the journalist's writing were not noticed by the writer or the editor.
I think Allen was just pointing it out for any who missed it (IiB?)
Did anyone check and see if The W0n has joined this movement?
The GM bondholders must have felt hijacked and robbed also. Pick and choose, pick and choose.
I wonder about the judges or whoever who make/sign these rulings? How does one get possession of a families belongings and sell them legally?
Something needs to be fixed here. And not "quietly."
Hopefully we will see a Righthaven comeuppance here and this dude and others will end up in prison where he (they) belongs.
Would you want to buy one of these houses from one of these criminals? Talk about a legal morass.
Bagoh -- isn't there something like a summary judgment that could have been requested by your lawyer? I am not an attorney, but I thought that was a TKO on some obvious and stupid (and wrong) lawsuits.
Me too JAL, and I requested it at every hearing (four of them), but the judge was just not comfortable with telling the lawyer he was an idiot and it would cost his victims any recovery. This was an insured defendant that would have paid. I was not insured because the injury occurred before my company even existed.
So the result was that it cost everyone involved a lot of money, and the injured was not compensated. The only ones who got anything out of it were the lawyers, and the incompetent one was paid by the hour for lots of time which he alone caused to be needed. All because the judge was a pussy.
That sounds crazy, bagoh, and I wish that was the same thing as "that sounds unbelievable". :(
How were you not at least able to recover damages from the lawyer? If ever there was good reason for making the plaintiff pick up the legal fees, "oops I sued the wrong guy" would seem to be it.
Plaintiff's lawyer blew it, but he was just going for what he could after he made the mistake. The judge is the one who failed to do his job.
As for pursuing for legal fees, I'm sure the lawyers would drool at the thought of me spending another load on that, but in the end, a judge is gonna decide, and that's not a good bet. I just have better things to do like comment here.
Post a Comment