you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 112 points 5 months ago (12 children)

Huh, I’m not an attorney but that sure seems actionable if the intended use was documented in a contract.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 145 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (7 children)

    She's got an attorney and they're trying to stop it based on that, but it just seems like everyone involved (edit: besides her) just doesn't give a fuck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 109 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    They've been taught that if they ignore the law and do whatever they want to they don't get punched in the face.

    That will only go on for so long but it's going to suck until someone gets punchy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 63 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Especially with the recent East Wing argument, the lesson is "if you do it fast enough and ignore other people getting angry about it, you can do whatever you want."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    What's the saying? "Ownership is 90% posession."

    Like with the stuff going on at the East Wing or the Kennedy Center, some people just move forward even if they're not allowed to because chances are they won't be stopped or penalized.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 19 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    The relevant case law may be found in Molotov vs. New Construction .

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments