| Pages:
1
2
3 |
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
Bad things make good copy. How boring would it be to only post entries by and about folks who have successfully managed to relocate to Baja and are
thrilled just being there?
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by The Gull
Damages described in your fantasy case, if any, are in Mexico. |
Interesting legal position you have there, Gully. Perhaps you can explain to the BajaNomads why this case was tried in California?
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/B13854...
I think some of those names look familiar.
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
elgatoloco
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4346
Registered: 11-19-2002
Location: Yes
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by arrowhead
| Quote: | Originally posted by The Gull
Damages described in your fantasy case, if any, are in Mexico. |
Interesting legal position you have there, Gully. Perhaps you can explain to the BajaNomads why this case was tried in California?
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/B13854...
I think some of those names look familiar. |
Can you summarize in fifty words mas or menos?
Gracias!
MAGA
marooons Are Governing America
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hmmm. A Summary Judgment finding no triable issues on appeal with the underlying case claiming defamation. Would have hoped you could have found
something more substantial. In fact, since this was at the appellate level, this court could only rule on the facts presented in the underlying case.
Whether the court of first impression erred in hearing the case is not at issue here. Come back when you find a better example.
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Bajahowodd
Hmmm. A Summary Judgment finding no triable issues on appeal with the underlying case claiming defamation. Would have hoped you could have found
something more substantial. In fact, since this was at the appellate level, this court could only rule on the facts presented in the underlying case.
Whether the court of first impression erred in hearing the case is not at issue here. Come back when you find a better example.
|
Maybe I can get you on the same page as everybody else and summarize the issues for elgatoloco at the same time. Let us review:
Arrowhead said: A US resident can sue in a US court for damages he incurred in Mexico.
The Gull said: Oh no. The damages are in Mexico, and the US court will toss the case out for lack of jurisdiction.
Arrowhead then posted a case wherein a US resident sued in a US court for damages he incurred in Mexico. The plaintiff lost the case because he was a
putz and didn't have a good case. He then appealed, again in a US court, and lost his appeal because he still didn't have a ggod case. Please note
that the original trial court did not throw out the case for lack of jurisdiction, neither did the appelate court. When one files a lawsuit, on the
very first page of the complaint there is a statement about whey the court you are filing in has jurisdiction. This is a requirement for a valid
complaint. Jurisdiction was never an issue, not even for the defendant.
Hey Gull, don't you agree that the plaintiff in this case was a putz and burned through a lot of money on a case he couldn't win?
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
The Gull
Super Nomad
Posts: 2223
Registered: 8-28-2003
Location: Rancho Descanso, BCN
Member Is Offline
Mood: High
|
|
Good review, Howard.
It would be better to have seen the facts presented for the actual trial. Regardless, it does appear as the plaintiffs did lose on the merits of
their complaint.
Dear A-head,
Getting in a court is not winning in a court - thank you (A-head) for proving my earlier point.
Also, to my earlier point: avid muckraking, ambulance chasing lawyers (and make-believe lawyers) are a foul bunch of frenzy feeders who always get
paid regardless of the trial's outcome.
Why don't you respond to my lunch invitation? Too scary?
Why don't you take all your pent-up hate and sanctimonious views and really go after the bad guys? Why not go after the 10,000 drug gang members in
the ghettos of SoCal and do an expose on them? Better yet, why don't you do an expose on the charming people of Hollywood who suck down all nature of
illegal drugs and then present the false face of decency to the public who pour billions into their slop on the silver screen?
Is it that those two groups could actually fight back, if you tried? In your mind, it is easier to attack another culture - one that you don't
understand - because it has had a large "beat down" already?
Hyenas like you have learned to stay at the edge of the pack, waiting to see weakness in the unsuspecting target of your attack.
[Edited on 2-28-2010 by The Gull]
�I won\'t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.� William F. Buckley, Jr.
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
I stand by my last post. The appellate court was charged to rule on the facts presented in the appeal. They were not asked to comment on jurisdiction.
And of course, since the Superior court never makes any mistakes, it could never have been a case of accepting a lawsuit over which they had no actual
jurisdiction. All I ask is that Arrowhead show me an adjudicated case in a US court of first impression wherein damages were awarded for anything
related to a real estate transaction in Mexico, involving fraud, deceit or failure to perform, which, I believe was the initial point of this thread.
|
|
|
tripledigitken
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4848
Registered: 9-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
I think the Trump case would be the perfect case to bring to a US Court and dispell/prove the legality of a case in the US over business in Mexico. I
haven't heard of that proceeding, anyone else?
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by The Gull
Getting in a court is not winning in a court - thank you (A-head) for proving my earlier point. |
No, Gully, your original point, which is still up here on this thread for anybody to read, was that the court would throw the case out. That did not
happen, the court tried the case and found the plaintiff could not raise a triable issue. You have now changed your point, after the fact, like the
pigs changed the sign on the side of the barn
| Quote: | Originally posted by The Gull
Why don't you respond to my lunch invitation? Too scary? |
Too far. How about someplace a little closer to home with no 2-hour line at the border? Ever heard of:
Los Gringos Locos
464 Foothill Blvd.
Flintridge, CA
| Quote: | Originally posted by The Gull
Why don't you take all your pent-up hate and sanctimonious views and really go after the bad guys? Why not go after the 10,000 drug gang members in
the ghettos of SoCal and do an expose on them? Better yet, why don't you do an expose on the charming people of Hollywood who suck down all nature of
illegal drugs and then present the false face of decency to the public who pour billions into their slop on the silver screen? |
Red herring
A "red herring" is an answer, given in reply to a questioner, that goes beyond an innocent logical irrelevance. A "red herring" is a deliberate
attempt to divert a process of enquiry by changing the subject.
A "red herring" is a debating tactic that seeks to divert an opponent.
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Bajahowodd
All I ask is that Arrowhead show me an adjudicated case in a US court of first impression wherein damages were awarded for anything related to a real
estate transaction in Mexico, involving fraud, deceit or failure to perform, which, I believe was the initial point of this thread.
|
No it wasn't. Read it again, s l o w l y.
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
Gull
| Quote: | Originally posted by arrowhead
| Quote: | Originally posted by Bajahowodd
All I ask is that Arrowhead show me an adjudicated case in a US court of first impression wherein damages were awarded for anything related to a real
estate transaction in Mexico, involving fraud, deceit or failure to perform, which, I believe was the initial point of this thread.
|
No it wasn't. Read it again, s l o w l y. |
This what a red herring actually looks like.
|
|
|
The Gull
Super Nomad
Posts: 2223
Registered: 8-28-2003
Location: Rancho Descanso, BCN
Member Is Offline
Mood: High
|
|
Looks red to me.
�I won\'t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.� William F. Buckley, Jr.
|
|
|
SDRonni
Nomad
Posts: 481
Registered: 8-28-2006
Location: Serra Mesa/Rosarito
Member Is Offline
|
|
I have to admit this thread made me nervous, as we signed our closing documents and gave the developer the total balance due. This was done in front
of the notario. The developer's bank(s) had liens on the property, but we were assured that they would be released. The developer said at the
closing that he was going directly to the bank and that he would not see a dime of our money. We were assured by the notario that the bank would be
in to sign off on the liens as soon as the developer delivered the funds to them. This was about a month ago. We have not yet received the fide.
After reading this thread and it making me almost sick, we called the notario's office today. We were told that the bank(s) DID come in and signed
off, all the documents are ready, and that our fide will be delivered w/in a couple of weeks. So, things aren't always bad. We are very happy with
our purchase. Not to say there weren't bumps along the way....we purchased in 8/06 and moved in early 12/09. But, as they say, good things come to
those who wait, and we ended up with a much better condo and location than we had originally purchased.  
|
|
|
Woooosh
Banned
Posts: 5240
Registered: 1-28-2007
Location: Rosarito Beach
Member Is Offline
Mood: Luminescent Waves at Rosarito Beach
|
|
I don't think anyone messes with the Notarios. It's the Mexico equivalent of a "closing"- you are all sitting in front of the Notario and his
reputation is on the line. They are very busy and very important.
Glad it all worked out for you. We didn't have any problems with the system and process either... none.
\"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing\"
1961- JFK to Canadian parliament (Edmund Burke)
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Woooosh
I don't think anyone messes with the Notarios. It's the Mexico equivalent of a "closing"- you are all sitting in front of the Notario and his
reputation is on the line. They are very busy and very important.
Glad it all worked out for you. We didn't have any problems with the system and process either... none. |
The issue at La Jolla de Rosarito happened long after the closing. People payed off their purchase money mortgages but the developer did not pay off
the underlying construction loan. So, no notario was involved at that point.
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
Woooosh
Banned
Posts: 5240
Registered: 1-28-2007
Location: Rosarito Beach
Member Is Offline
Mood: Luminescent Waves at Rosarito Beach
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by audiobaja
I think Bajajazz is lamenting the added venom, not just the news, good or bad, itself. There's a lot of angry people here, which is unfortunate.
|
Seriously. But many of us invested in and retired to a beautiful, peaceful place that we no longer recognize and you have to consider that
perspective.
\"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing\"
1961- JFK to Canadian parliament (Edmund Burke)
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
That's a good point. Especially important to note that many newer Nomads are probably not familiar with some of the major real estate problems and
scandals that were encountered by the veterans on the forum. Other than just not buying in Mexico, one must be VERY careful.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
