Governor's Island Lawsuit
 

from the Laconia Daily Sun

..."asking the court to decide whether or not the trial court committed a reversible error by finding the petitioned had no duty to mitigate its damages that led to the legal fees"

Sorry I'm no lawyer so what the heck does that mean? Homsi won the suit filed against him by the GIA?

The article says Homsi lost... and the court ordered him to demolish what was already built.

All Hornsi has to do.
 

is run for state legislature, win and you can do what you damn well please. Just ask my neighbor!

Sounds like a good topic for an afternoon of rafting..
 

Love to hear the story, but I understand not putting in the forum. ;)

Long Court Case
 

And so it continues. The case started in court in 2012 and continues on. The subject property is the first one on the mainland side just north of the Governor's Island bridge.

To me, it seems that the Governor's Island Club should have nothing to do with a property that is not on the island, but the way it is set up that is not the case.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...76bf8b9a9.html

The law firms involved in this lengthy saga must be doing well !

The attorneys for appellant might have reason to be nervous: one basis for appeal is him seeming to believe that the trial court had a duty to tell him he'd have to pay attorney fees if he lost.

Duh...really?

This is the sort of thing his own attorney should have told him, it is not the purview of the court to give a litigant legal advice.

Possible malpractice if he was never informed of this potential liability by his attorney?

Is the defendant acting as his own lawyer?
The article lists the GIC (?) lawyer. And I am guessing that the reimbursed legal fees are all going to his firm. So the longer it goes on the more they make should they prevail.

The issue seems to be that a previous owner opted into the GIA, and the related deed restrictions associated with it.


Now that the property is a part of the GIA, they are legally obligated to hold the property to the deed restrictions outlined. Failure to do so creates an opening for other GIA residents to claim precedent for the association not upholding their bylaws and declarations, thus allowing them to ignore building restrictions and construct whatever they like. I am pretty sure this is the last thing that the GIA would want to deal with, as it would just create an utter free for all on the island.


I don't know any of the parties involved, or any of the history of this, but for the most part the GIA is likely acting out of a requirement here, not just some kind of petty HOA drama.


This is just based on my personal experience running a rather large HOA in Florida with a lot of residents that I refer to as "rich assholes" (but in a nice way). A tenure that is happily coming to an end soon :)

He is not represented. Defendant Homsi is representing himself.

He is representing himself.

LOL, well I guess that explains it.

You know what they say about people who represent themselves in court...

All something like this is, is HOA drama.... The Answer is really quite simple, a previous owner opted into the HOA...... The HOA can opt to kick the current owner out of the HOA..... While I know it is not that simple.... this is all 1% problems....

You cannot just opt out or Homsi would have done so and avoided all of these problems. He has no desire to be in the "Club" would drop that membership in a heartbeat.

Why does it matter if it’s a so-termed “1% problem”?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I think Govenors Island are well represented by the 1% crowd, if you aren't one don't worry most of us aren't, that's why it's 1%