paragon back open?

Post by **Dieselram** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:47 pm

http://www.timesleader.com/mld/timesleader/16645738.htm This could be a step in the right direction

Website · Post by **tsmall07** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:15 pm

damn its still not lookin good. I'm afraid that I will never get the chance to go to this awesome place.

Post by **yotacowboy** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:21 am

did you read the article?

the judge denied almost every motion made by the "bad guys" (Gladstone) and ruled the bond payment to be $7000 or so... gladstone had demanded a $40 million bond be payed to maintain use of the property. the land is (pending payment of the $7000 bond) going to be "open" though the process of the appeal. this is good news, in that the judge kind of saying the circumstances of the breach of the lease are not clear. this judge isn't connected to the plaintiffs like the judge in the lower court was...

Website · Post by **tsmall07** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:04 am

Thats not exactly what he's saying. Its just like when I appealed a speeding ticket. I didn't have to pay anything until after my appeal was over.

Lukipela · Post by **Lukipela** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:48 am

they cant close paragon i haven't gotten the chance to take my shit up there and break it yet

and i will loose the best wheeling close to my house

Post by **yotacowboy** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 7:02 pm

tsmall07 wrote:Thats not exactly what he's saying. Its just like when I appealed a speeding ticket. I didn't have to pay anything until after my appeal was over.

not quite, there's precedence for land owners to claim that any suspected abuse or breach of that contract is grounds for forfeiture, especially when it stems from "the normal business operations" taking place on the property. whether or not it applies in Penn, i'm not sure, but it is a little different, legally.