Monday, April 21, 2008

FW: NCTimes-Sifuentes: Decision may be uncorked for 'boutique" wineries


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:16:58 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: NCTimes-Sifuentes: Decision may be uncorked for 'boutique" wineries

Monday, April 21, 2008
Last modified Sunday, April 20, 2008 7:41 PM PDT


REGION: Decision may be uncorked for 'boutique' wineries

By EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff Writer

 

County supervisors are scheduled to decide Wednesday whether small wineries that want to offer tasting rooms will be required to pay for expensive building permits and environmental studies.

Winemakers in the Ramona area say that a requirement to pay for the permits and studies to open tasting rooms would dash their hopes of reviving the once-booming industry.

 

County officials have been struggling to find a compromise between vintners and their neighbors to create an ordinance that will allow "boutique" wineries to open tasting rooms without having to pay more than the $40,000 that some of the permits and studies cost.

In their recommendation to supervisors, county planners said the ordinance should require winery operators who want tasting rooms to conduct environmental impact reports addressing traffic, noise and related issues.

Despite those recommendations, the county Planning Commission, in a split vote April 4, sided with winemakers and ruled the studies weren't necessary.

It will be up to the supervisors to make the final decision.

Carolyn Harris, a member of the Ramona Valley Vineyards Association, said few winemakers could afford to produce such a study.

The association, which has led the fight to create the ordinance, represents about a dozen Ramona-area wineries.

"I don't think you're going to see too many applications for major-use permits" to build tasting rooms, Harris said Friday. "I can guarantee you that."

Ordinance proponents have said that making it easier for boutique wineries to open tasting rooms could help resurrect the industry, attract tourists and increase the county's tax base.

Opponents, including some backcountry residents, say they are worried that the wineries, some of which are on private roads, would create public safety hazards, such as drunken drivers, on poorly maintained roads.

In December, the supervisors asked county planners to address the question of allowing boutique wineries on private roads.

Owners proposed a plan that would allow small wineries with tasting rooms on private roads with fewer than 10 residences to create road maintenance agreements with neighbors.

Applicants on private roads with more than 10 residences would need a permit from the county.

Harris said the county's Department of Planning and Land Use and the county counsel threw wineries a curve ball late in the game, saying last month that if the ordinance is approved without requiring winery owners to conduct environmental studies, it could expose the county to a lawsuit.

Harris said the county should have made that determination two years ago, when the discussion about the ordinance began.

"We just wasted two years of our lives, thank you very much," Harris said.

Ordinance opponents say that requiring wineries to apply for a major-use permit, which includes the environmental study, is only fair to their neighbors.

"I know that some people think that the whole concept of having small wineries is neat, but you don't give up your zoning" requirements, said Jack Phillips, chairman of the Valle del Oro Community Planning Group.

The supervisors are scheduled to meet at 9 a.m. Wednesday at the county administration building in San Diego.
Contact staff writer Edward Sifuentes at (760) 740-3511 or esifuentes@nctimes.com.

 

***********************************

 

Charlene Sez:  I think the Gibson letter to the participants was talking about an EIR for the ordinance itself which would cost the County $250,000.  


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:

FW: Flood Management Association: Upcoming Workshops and Events


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:39:00 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Flood Management Association:  Upcoming Workshops and Events
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: Floodplain Management Association <admin@floodplain.org>
To: char.ayers@worldnet.att.net
Subject: FMA Upcoming Workshops and Events
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:37:26 +0000

Floodplain Management Association Workshops and Events 2008 Visit www.floodplain.org <http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001TI_AwM_XbjGduhcBhd75tIx0FQ3Dofn3uBHjHzBkmoZ-cH7md_3kki9l8o4_4Zwf-qm845c9a9aexEI4DFErXXfAayA5ILIGfph-gymMMmQIjkeeRw7LwA==>  to register!
 

FMA is pleased to announce the following professional development courses designed for engineers, regulators, planners, floodplain managers and stormwater professionals involved in water issues:


    Watershed Modeling with HEC-HMS: Overview and Applications, May 28, Sacramento, California

  • HEC-HMS Complete Course, June 24-26, McClellan, California (12 CEC)

  • Certified Professional in Storm Water Quality (CPSWQ) Training and Exam, July 8-9, Carson City, Nevada

  • Fundamentals of Hydrology and Hydraulics for Engineers, July 28-30, Carson City, Nevada (12 CEC)

Posted by at No comments:

FW: Groundwater Resources Association: Upcoming Events


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:40:14 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Groundwater Resources Association: Upcoming Events
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "Groundwater Resources Association" <dbadmin@grac.org>
To: "Charlene Ayers" <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: GRA Upcoming Events
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:45:04 +0000


GROUNDWATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION
o f   C a l i f o r n i a

Upcoming GRA Events



GRA Legislative Symposium and Lobby Day
April 23, 2008 - Sacramento, CA
Join the GRA Members, the California Groundwater Coalition and a distinguished list of legislators, regulators and Administration officials in the Capitol, as we ask the question... If we had all the money we need for groundwater storage, including additional recycled water, how much water supply could we really develop?
Symposium Web Page ˆ http://www.grac.org/legsymposium.asp

GRA Vadose Zone Hydrology, Contamination, and Modeling Course
June 9-11, 2008 - Los Angeles, CA
The objective of the Course is to introduce the principles of vadose zone flow and transport, including gas and multiphase transport phenomena (VOCs); to discuss field characterization and monitoring techniques appropriate for model data collection; to introduce common modeling techniques and their limitations; and to provide hands-on experience with several commonly used one- and multidimensional computer models for vadose flow, transport, and multiphase flow.
Course Web Page ˆ http://www.grac.org/vadose.asp

GRA in Cooperation with DTSC and EPA: Remediation Technology Symposium
May 14-16, 2008 - Sacramento, CA
DTSC will host a free, public three-day Remediation Technology Symposium from May 14 through May 16 in Sacramento and via webcast. The target audiences are: community members impacted by contaminated sites, interested Brownfields developers, cleanup consultants, DTSC cleanup and CUPA staffs and other state, local agencies.
Symposium Web Page ˆ http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste/Remediation.cfm

GRA Climate Change Symposium: Implications for California Groundwater Management
August 12-13, 2008 - Sacramento, CA
Abstract submittal deadline is June 1, 2008.
The conference will focus on three primary tracks: 1) technical aspects of climate change impacts on groundwater availability and timing and water supply and demand; 2) legal and policy issues; and, 3) what is a groundwater manager/agency to do?
Symposium Web Page and Call For Abstracts ˆ http://www.grac.org/climate.asp

GRA Principles of Groundwater Flow & Transport Modeling Course
September 22-24, 2008 - Redwood City, CA
This course introduces the conceptual principles and practical aspects of groundwater modeling in an intuitive yet comprehensive manner.
Course Web Page ˆ http://www.grac.org/modeling.asp

GRA Introduction to Practical Statistics Workshop
September 24, 2008 - Costa Mesa, CA
Lets face it, statistics wasn't your favorite course in college. It didn't seem to connect with real life, or even ground water science. But now you need to make sense of your data. This workshop will help those jilted by statistics to be reconciled.
Workshop Web Page ˆ http://www.grac.org/stats.asp

GRA 17th Annual Meeting and Conference
September 24-26, 2008 - Costa Mesa, CA
Abstract submittal deadline is May 1, 2008.
GRA has partnered with stakeholders from all segments of the profession and industry to develop an annual conference that covers technical, regulatory, legal, and policy issues affecting groundwater and facilitates networking and the exchange of the latest research and information.
Conference Web Page and Call For Abstracts ˆ http://www.grac.org/am08.asp

GRA Applications of Optimization Techniques to Groundwater Projects Symposium
October 15 & 16, 2008 - Sacramento, CA
This day-and-a-half symposium will focus on the uses of operations research (optimization) techniques in addressing groundwater projects.
Symposium Web Page ˆ http://www.grac.org/optimization.asp

GRA Emerging Contaminants 2008 Symposium
November 19-20, 2008 - San Jose, CA
Abstract submittal deadline is August 10, 2008.
GRA's one and a half day event will profile the latest developments in detection, risk assessment, remediation and regulation of emerging contaminants in groundwater.
Symposium Web Page and Call For Abstracts ˆ http://www.grac.org/contaminants.asp


Exhibitors and Sponsors
If you are interested in exhibiting your organization's services or products, or being a sponsor for any of GRA's upcoming symposia, please contact Mary Megarry at mmegarry@nossaman.com or 916-446-3626.
Sponsorship & Exhibitor Information Packet ˆ http://www.grac.org/se.doc


For more information about GRA's programs e-mail Kathy Snelson, GRA Executive Director at executive_director@grac.org.



GRA is dedicated to resource management that protects and improves groundwater
through education and technical leadership.

915 L St, Ste 1000 * Sacramento, CA 95814 * Ph: 916-446-3626 * Fx: 916-442-0382 * www.grac.org <http://www.grac.org/>

To be removed from this mailing list, please reply to this message and write Remove subject.



------ End of Forwarded Message

Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, April 19, 2008

FW: NCTimes-Sifuentes: Region: Decision on tap for 'boutique' wineries


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:11:32 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: NCTimes-Sifuentes: Region: Decision on tap for 'boutique' wineries

Saturday, April 19, 2008
Last modified Friday, April 18, 2008 12:26 PM PDT


REGION: Decision on tap for 'boutique' wineries

By EDWARD SIFUENTES - Staff Writer

County supervisors are scheduled to decide Wednesday whether small wineries that want to offer tasting rooms will be required to pay for expensive building permits.

Winemakers in the Ramona area say that requiring them to pay for the permits and environmental studies to open tasting rooms would dash their hopes of reviving their once-booming industry.

County officials have been struggling to find a compromise between vintners and their neighbors to create an ordinance that will allow "boutique" wineries to open tasting rooms without having to pay for the studies, which can cost more than $40,000.

In their recommendation to the supervisors, county planners said the ordinance should require winery operators to pay for environmental impact reports.

Despite those recommendations, the county Planning Commission, in a split vote on April 4, sided with winemakers and ruled environmental studies weren't necessary. It will be up to the supervisors to make the final decision.

Carolyn Harris, a member of the Ramona Valley Vineyards Association, said that if winemakers are required to produce an environmental study to open a tasting room, few could afford to do so.

"I don't think you're going to see too many major-use permits" to build tasting rooms, Harris said Friday. "I can guarantee you that."

The supervisors meeting is scheduled for 9 a.m. Wednesday at the county administration building in San Diego.

Contact staff writer Edward Sifuentes at (760) 740-3511 or esifuentes@nctimes.com.


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:

FW: BlogOfSD-Flannery: The missing email. Sanders has a decision to make. 04/19/08


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:04:16 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: BlogOfSD-Flannery: The missing email. Sanders has a decision to make. 04/19/08

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "Pat Flannery - Blog" <pat@blogofsandiego.com>
To: "Pat Flannery" <pat@blogofsandiego.com>
Subject: The missing email. Sanders has a decision to make. 04/19/08
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 08:16:50 +0000


The missing email. Sanders has a decision to make. 04/19/08
                                        by Pat Flannery                         

Former Assistant Chief Operating Officer (ACOO) for the City of San Diego, Rick Reynolds, filed a lawsuit <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Sanders/IP_Gate/reynoldssuit.pdf>  this week against the City. Before being fired by Sanders on September 28, 2007 he had been responsible for nine City Depart ments, supervised approximately 1,400 City employees and managed more than $300 million of the City's annual budget. He has been unable to find a job since.

Mr. Reynolds' troubles began when the City's email screening system flagged an email from Fred Sainz, Director of Communications (DOC) for the Office of the Mayor, to Bob Kittle, editorial writer for the San Diego Union-Tribune, dated September 7, 2007. The email was snagged by the system because it contained numerous instances of the "f" word in reference to certain staff at the City Attorney's office and certain members of the City Council.

Chief Information Officer <http://www.sandiego.gov/ocio/index.shtml>  (CIO), Matt McGarvey, brought the offending email to his superior, ACOO Rick Reynolds, who in turn brought it to his superior, Chief Operating Officer (COO) Jay Goldstone. As it happens, Matt McGarvey quit the City this week to work nearer his home in Vista. I guess he "needed to spend more time with his family".

This particular spate of nastiness against Aguirre started with a blast email <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Aguirre/ItalianoEmail.pdf>  from MEA <https://www.sdmea.org/>   leader Judie Italiano to her 4,800 union members calling Aguirre a "mad man". It brought this warning <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Aguirre/Chadwick-Italiano.pdf>  dated August 9, 2007, from Scott Chadwick  the City's Labor Relations Director, regarding its "inappropriate use of the City's email system".

 

Despite being given a copy of an obscene and abusive email written by Sainz, Jay Goldstone his boss, did nothing about either the obscenity or the "inappropriate use of the City's email system". Far from being reprimanded, Sainz continued to work with his buddy Kittle (an outside person who does not work for the City) in an effort to destroy Mike Aguirre and to discredit those working for him - i.e. City staff!

Sainz obtained (and presumably still has) the IP addresses of all the computers on the desks of everybody who works in the City Attorney's office. Whoever heard of such a thing? Did he plan on impersonating Mike Aguirre or members of his staff over the Internet? Why else would he do such a thing? Did he hand those IP addresses to Bob Kittle? What use has Kittle put them to in the meantime?

Read the lawsuit fil ed this week <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Sanders/IP_Gate/reynoldssuit.pdf>  for a complete description of how Sainz ordered and obtained the IP addresses from the CIO's office on September 26, 2007. If it weren't for the fact that the Chief Information Officer <http://www.sandiego.gov/ocio/index.shtml>  (CIO), Matt McGarvey, was on vacation that day we may never have found out about it. In the absence of his boss, a subordinate at the CIO brought the IP request to McGarvey's boss, Rick Reynolds.

Thank goodness there were still a few honorable people left in the City at the time and that Rick Reynolds was one of them. Like everybody in San Diego Reynolds knew that Mayor Sanders was waging a war to get rid of City Attorney Mike Aguirre. Sanders hadn't particularly liked being called corrupt over Sunroad a few weeks earlier.

It is clear that Sainz' boss, Chief Operating Officer Jay Goldstone, conspiring to cover up Sainz's actions. But "what did the Mayor know and when did he know it?". For the Mayor the parallel with Watergate is obvious. He can no longer blame his staff.



Attempting to gain access to the computer of the City Attorney is the electronic equivalent of the Watergate bag job. That cover-up led to Nixon's last helicopter ride out of the White House - in disgrace.

Rick Reynolds, an ex-Navy officer and straight shooter, protested Sainz action in a memo to Goldstone dated September 27, 2007:

"the information could be combined with network logs or other trackable system information, resulting in individually identifiable information which would typically not be available for or subject to disclosure. In addition, disclosure of our internal IP addresses to any unauthorized parties would violate system security policies by providing information that could be used maliciously for 'hacking' or gaining unauthorized access, to City systems (either internally or externally)."  

Goldstone's reaction: he fired Reynolds! Loyalty trumps honor in the Sanders' administration. Goldstone chose loyalty to his boss (and to his $250,000 salary).

But now for the interesting part.

Pursuant to a Public Records Request, I have Fred Sainz's emails for the period concerned, August <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Sanders/IP_Gate/August.pdf> , September <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Sanders/IP_Gate/September.pdf>  and October <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Sanders/IP_Gate/October.pdf>  2007. They make interesting reading for other reasons too. More of that later.

But surprise, surprise! The obscene email to Bob Kittle dated September 7, 2007 is missing! Perhaps Fred considered it too much  for delicate ears such as mine or yours.

I don't know what the legal penalty for such a breach of the Public Records Act (PRA) is, but I can safely say that the political penalty for withholding such a document of great public interest as that email has now become, may be a "for real" picture of Sanders as the one above. And he will not be boarding a Marine helicopter.

For more background information and links to various documents associated with this story, read my blogs dated September 9, 2007 <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Archives/BlogOfSanDiego07_2.htm#09/30/07> ,  October 2, 2007 <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Archives/BlogOfSanDiego07_2.htm#10/02/07> and October 14, 2007 <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/Archives/BlogOfSanDiego07_2.htm#10/14/07a> . It seems that our Mayor's Office together with our monopoly newspaper the U-T, has dedicated an enormous amount of City and U-T time trying to discredit Mike Aguirre. Why?

Do you still think Mike is a little paranoid? Or is there something to what he says is going on? Is Sanders really corrupt, as Aguirre says he is? Is that what this is all about? Is that why they need to get rid of Aguirre so badly? We know there is a lot of money at stake for the unions in the pension issue. Is our City government all about special interest? Are Aguirre and Frye the only ones not in it for the money?

Sanders could clear the IP-gate issue up very quickly, by releasing the emails that were withheld in the above PRA request. But then he may have to fire Sainz, maybe even Goldstone. Stay tuned.


 
Click here <http://www.blogofsandiego.com/> for the latest „Blog of San Diego‰ by Pat Flannery
 
 
 
 
 


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:

FW: Where's the $$: Guidestar: Don't Take Chances - Identify Supporting Organizations


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 06:20:08 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Where's the $$: Guidestar: Don't Take Chances - Identify Supporting Organizations
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: RE: Guidestar: Don't Take Chances - Identify Supporting Organizations
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:37:46 +0000

Charlene
 
California passed a Non-Profit Integrity Act in 2004 that authorized regulation of non-profits by the Attorney General.  The AG did set-up a website that Ranters might find interesting at http://ag.ca.gov/charities/index.php.  Problem is that the Œsearch function‚ to obtain information on non-profit tax returns, etc. doesn‚t work (and the website refers parties to GuideStar - which charges a fee - as a first source of information).  
 
By law, non-profits must make annual filings with the AG‚s Registry of Charitable Trusts and pay a fee; which is supposed to subsidize a system of information access for public use.  
 
According to the AG website, there are 150,000 registered charitable trusts in California.  At a median filing fee of $125 per year fee, it would seem that over $15 million is raised annually to operate the AG‚s website for trusts, including a public access search feature.  As with a lot of other stuff in this state, the money seems to go in to Sacramento but the prepaid service isn‚t available.
 
xxxxxx

 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "GuideStar" <customerservice@guidestar.org>
To: "" <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Don't Take Chances - Identify Supporting Organizations
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:05:12 +0000



Make sure you receive our e-mails.
Please add customerservice@guidestar.org to your address book.
<http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_term=Banner%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCha> <http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_term=Banner%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw>  

Avoid fines with GuideStar Charity Check <http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_term=Charity%2BCheck%2BText%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin> <http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_term=Charity%2BCheck%2BText%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail>  .

One-click grantmaker due diligence gives you:

  • Easy-to-read icons displayed on an organization's GuideStar Report
  • 100% compliance with the Pension Protection Act of 2006*
  • Quick and easy documentation of your research
Don't take risks. Verify an organization's charitable status every time you
give a gift or grant with GuideStar Charity Check <http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_term=Charity%2BCheck%2BText%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin> <http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_term=Charity%2BCheck%2BText%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail>  .
<http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_term=Button%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCha> <http://www.guidestar.org/services/cc.jsp?utm_source=E-mail&amp;amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_term=Button%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw>  
Click to Verify

*100% compliant with IRS guidelines for identifying supporting organizations.

Organizations identified as 509(a)(3) require further research.
<http://www.guidestar.org/?utm_source=E-mail&amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_term=GuideStar%2BLogo%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%> <http://www.guidestar.org/?utm_source=E-mail&amp;amp;utm_medium=E-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_term=GuideStar%2BLogo%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fout%2BCharity%2BCheck&amp;amp;utm_content=Dice%2B-%2BE-mail%2B-%2BOptin%2Bw%2Fou>  

4801 Courthouse Street, Suite 220, Williamsburg, VA 23188.


Tell your friends about this.

Tell-a-friend! <http://ga3.org/join-forward.html?domain=guidestar_business&amp;r=h1aLI-5qGGg9> <http://ga3.org/join-forward.html?domain=guidestar_business&amp;amp;r=h1aLI-5qGGg9>  

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for GuideStar Info <http://ga3.org/guidestar_business/join.html?r=h1aLI-5qGGg9E> .


This message was sent to char.ayers@att.net. Visit your subscription management page <http://ga3.org/guidestar_business/smp.tcl?nkey=g5d3be9a7w6ikem&amp;> <http://ga3.org/guidestar_business/smp.tcl?nkey=g5d3be9a7w6ikem&amp;amp;>   to modify your email communication preferences or update your personal profile. To stop ALL email from GuideStar Info, click to remove <http://ga3.org/guidestar_business/remove-domain-direct.tcl?ctx=center&amp;nkey=g5d3be9a7w6ikem&amp;> <http://ga3.org/guidestar_business/remove-domain-direct.tcl?ctx=center&amp;amp;nkey=g5d3be9a7w6ikem&amp;amp;>   yourself from our lists (or reply via email with "remove or unsubscribe" in the subject line).

<http://www.convio.com/>




------ End of Forwarded Message

Posted by at No comments:

FW: Interesting thought: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 05:49:16 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Interesting thought: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: RE: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:47:59 +0000

Interesting thought.  My forebears were Philadelphia Quaker merchants; couldn‚t bear to fight in the Revolution but certainly supported it by giving-over horses, feed and woolens.  But they were also slave-owners and eager to get their fingers into every aspect of society that benefited the business ˆ including government, etc.  
 

From: char.ayers@att.net [mailto:char.ayers@att.net]
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 7:24 PM
To: Charlene Ayers
Subject: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Re: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:55:15 +0000


The Founding Fathers understood no such thing.

Those founding fathers....understood the importance of separating church and State, keeping "politics out of public schools and church"... and keeping "church out of politics and public schools."


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:

FW: What "all" came to be...: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:26:29 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: What "all" came to be...: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "Booklady" <book1@aabol.com>
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Re: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:15:05 +0000

If I may be allowed to enter a small statement, without changing the original subject of this series. What this ranter indicates is that the First Amendment separates Church from State.  It certainly does, but it also says that Congress (the government) may not "prohibit the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech..."  While it says Congress shall not establish a religion, that means a state mandated religion, a situation the early settlers left behind in England.  Yet the government (through the schools and courts) does deny the free exercise thereof every time it denies people (of all religions) the right to pray in public wherever they are at the time - a graduation ceremony or a basketball game. Unfortunately our founding fathers, of which some were my ancestors (who settled the Virginia colonies) could not possibly conceive what would come in today's world.  They wanted freedom for all, without persecution, but they couldn't imagine what "all" would come to be.
Nancy Slaff
----- Original Message -----
From: char.ayers@att.net
To: Charlene Ayers <mailto:char.ayers@att.net>  
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 5:35 PM
Subject: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxxx
To: char.ayers@att.net
Subject: Re: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:08:15 +0000

DIV { MARGIN: 0px }
This Ranter seems straight, but I am only vaguely familiar with James Hartline or his report... seems tabloid like and right of right in partisan politics agenda itself. To call Jim Kelly a Liberal Republican is laughable...he may be just right of the extreme right wing, but that leaves miles of real estate before one can be labeled "A liberal" or even a moderate Republican.
 
Kelly calls the Teachers Union a liberal group, Ha ... the vast majority of teachers in East County are conservative Republicans. Yes, left of Kelly but still far away from liberal. And School Boards are non-partisan elected positions... lest Kelly, Nehring, and their also right wing cohorts Schreiber and Udall wrestle with their war of words and paranoia... leave us be... get on private school boards and out of the public domain! And Bill Wells is a Skyliner... figures... the evangelicals are the power grabbers within themselves.
 
Seems to many that, Kelly, Schreiber, this Hartline person... they all are blind to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from discrimination, and just about every freedom the constitution was meant to provide under TJ's, the Adams's , Franklins', George Washington as they wrote it.  And the lot that wrote the Federalist Papers, thus explained background giving great insight into their intent for our constitution.
 
Those founding fathers were Gods' children, very religious, but they understood the importance of separating church and State, keeping "politics out of public schools and church"... and keeping "church out of politics and public schools."
 
I'm a sensible Christian... floating in hope and grasping at reasonable conservative space... thinking both major political parties are controlled by extremist idiots. I'm appalled at the evangelical infighting that puts Kelly against Schreiber, just an example of evangelical power grabs and their destruction of the Republican party.
 
When does "one nation with liberty and justice for all" become the focus of our citizens' freedoms, and when will the discriminating wrath of the evangelical right understand that they can't mandate their bias on the open minded Christians and other religious denominations? Let God be their only true judge... I certainly can't understand enough to make any sense of their mess at GUHSD.
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
 


 
----- Original Message ----
From: "char.ayers@att.net" <char.ayers@att.net>
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 2:22:26 PM
Subject: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: RE: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:58:55 +0000

Of course it matters who we elect.  T Ryan¢s administration of GUHSD and Prop H was incompetent.  The Board of Trustees proved incompetent too by exercising zero oversight (made abundantly clear by the Bond Advisory Committee¢s Finance Report).
Ryan became superintendent in part by virtue of church connections with trustee Kelly; who also knew Ryan from the undistinguished tenures of both of them in the County Office of Education.   There was no rigorous ¡search¢ process to find a top-notch proven superintendent once Kelly and his cronies Cass and Wells decided Ward Granger had to go.  
Some of the internecine church-connected stuff at play has been reported here: http://jameshartlinereport.blogspot.com/2006/10/san-diegos-political-wars-_116223135418945689.html.   
 

From: char.ayers@att.net [mailto:char.ayers@att.net]
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 10:46 AM
To: Charlene Ayers
Subject: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: char.ayers@att.net
Subject: Re: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:16:31 +0000

Very interesting... "Quantum Meriut... Quasi Contract".  I wonder how this legal concept would apply to Grossmont Union should they end up defaulting on their "Quasi Contract" (Prop H) with the public (voters) promising a new 12th high school?

 

The sad reality (in this case how do you hold a public entity, "GUHSD", responsible for management incompetence) is that courts would likely treat a school district with more latitude than a commercial entity or private business person. Taxpayers would essentially be taking legal action against themselves, since ultimately our taxes pay for their "GUHSD" mismanagement and fiscal irresponsibility!

 

Case in point,"It really does matter who we elect to represent us"... at GUHSD our elected trustees hired Terry Ryan.. who took Prop H from poor planning before he arrived at GUHSD to a state of total collapse during his tenure... and his staff aided and abetted in the cover up, and left overs seem to continue the cover-up post T Ryan... don't figure!

 

Let's trust new Supt. Collins can see the past injustices (incompetence's) and right the "Titanic" of school bond management screw-ups! He seems to be on the right track so far... if time doesn't run out before its' to late to fix things, hmmmm... maybe "Quasi Contract" taxpayer revolt!

 

XxXxXx

  :  )

----- Original Message ----
From: "char.ayers@att.net" <char.ayers@att.net>
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 6:22:23 PM
Subject: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: RE: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:17:17 +0000

Great work Charlene!
Please keep us posted.
I'm certainly rusted up in Latin so I looked up the quantum meruit
phrase.
It seems to bail down to...you screwed someone and now have to pay.
Small wonder with these jerks. Wonder how many more will flare up?
xxxxx
 
 

quantum meruit
 
    
 
 
 
[Latin, As much as is deserved.] In the law of contracts, a doctrine by which the law infers a promise to pay a reasonable amount for labor and materials furnished, even in the absence of a specific legally enforceable agreement between the parties.
A party who performs a valuable service for another party usually enters into a written contract or agreement before performing the service, particularly when the party is in the business of performing that service. For instance, most professional roofers hired to repair a roof insist on having a formal agreement with the owner of the house before beginning the repairs. In the absence of an agreement or formal contract, the roofer may be unable to recover losses in court if the transaction goes awry. Quantum meruit is a judicial doctrine that allows a party to recover losses in the absence of an agreement or binding contract.
By allowing the recovery of the value of labor and materials, quantum meruit prevents the Unj ust Enrichment of the other party. A person would be unjustly enriched if she received a benefit and did not pay for it when fairness required that payment be made. Quantum meruit can be used to address situations where no contract exists or where a contract exists but for some reason is unenforceable. In such cases courts imply a contract to avoid an unjust result. Such contracts are called quasi contracts.
Quantum meruit also describes a method used to determine the exact amount owed to a person. A court may measure this amount either by determining how much the defendant has benefited from the transaction or by determining how much the plaintiff has expended in materials and services.
The doctrine of quantum meruit was developed in the seventeenth century by the royal Court of Chancery in England. This court worked apart from the common-law courts to g rant r elief that was due under general principles of fairness but could not be ob tained under the strict legal prec e dents of the common-law courts. The system of basing decisions on basic principles of fairness became known as Equity <http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Equity> . The Chancery Court developed quantum meruit along with other equitable doctrines that allowed a person to recover or collect for other valuable acts performed without a contract, such as the delivery of goods or money. Some of the first cases of quantum meruit involved recovery by persons in so-called trades of common calling, such as innkeepers, tailors, blacksmiths, and tanners.
As service industries increased, so did claims for recovery under quantum meruit, and the doctrine was adopted by colonial courts. U.S. courts now apply quantum meruit principles in a wide variety of cases, including cases involving attorneys' fees, physicians' fee s, con struction work, government contracts, and even domestic rel ations suits for "palimon y. " Palimony is a form of financial support that is similar to Alimony <http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Alimony>  but arises out of a nonmarital relationship.
Courts have crafted four basic elements that the plaintiff must prove before she may recover under the doctrine of quantum meruit: (1) that valuable services were rendered; (2) that the services were rendered to the defendant; (3) that the services were accepted, used, and enjoyed by the defendant; and (4) that the defendant was aware that the plaintiff, in performing the services, expected to be paid by the defendant.
The case of Montes v. Naismith and Trevino Construction Co., 459 S.W.2d 691 (Tex. Civ. App. 1970), illustrates how quantum meruit works. In August 1968 Abraham Montes began oral negotiations with Abdon Perez regarding improvements Montes sought for h is homestead. Perez testified that Montes brought a cont ract to him more than once, but that the contract was never complete, and no contract was ever signed. Despite the lack of a contract, Perez arranged for the Naismith and Trevino Construction Company to do the work on Montes's house. Montes paid $1,800 to Perez, and Perez withdrew from the transaction.
Naismith and Trevino made improvements on Montes's homestead for a total value of $3,835.36, but Montes refused to pay for the improvements. Naismith and Trevino brought suit against Montes, arguing that even though they did not have a contract with Montes, they should be paid for their labor and the materials they used in making improvements to his house. The court agreed and entered judgment for Naismith and Trevino in the amount of $1,760, the amount of the services and materials provided by Naismith and Trevino less the amount Montes had paid to Perez. The court based its ruling on the theory of quantum meruit.
T he d oc trine of quantum meruit is contained in court d ecisio ns an d, to a lesser extent, in statutes. It can be a confusing doctrine: many courts mix quantum meruit with the similar principles of restitution and unjust enrichment. Restitution is a broad term that describes measures taken by a civil or criminal defendant to restore a victim to the status that he enjoyed before the defendant caused a loss or injury. Unjust enrichment is an equitable approach to civil relationships that covers more than just contractual situations. A civil plaintiff may recover under the doctrine of unjust enrichment by showing (1) that the plaintiff conferred a benefit on the defendant; (2) that the defendant appreciated or knew of the benefit; and (3) that, under the circumstances, it was unfair for the defendant to accept or retain the benefit without paying for it. Most courts consider quantum meruit a particular form of legal restitution that follows the basic restitutionary principle of preventing un jus t enrichment.
< /TBODY >



From: char.ayers@att.net
To: char.ayers@att.net
Subject: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:45:15 +0000

 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxxx
To: "Charlene Ayers" <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: new lawsuit
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:41:54 +0000

 

Lecg, LLC. v. REI-NC, LLC.; Gonya Enterprises, Inc.; Paul Gonya; Kenneth Stroud; David Waitley
4/15/2008 37-2008-00082011 Complaint for breach of contract; promissory fraud; account stated; quantum meruit; declaratory relief. Defendants REI breached the agreement by failing to pay for services rendered by Mack Barclay and Lecg. Defendants have failed to pay the outstanding balance of over $172,000.00
 

 


 



------ End of Forwarded Message

Posted by at No comments:

FW: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:24:16 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Re: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:55:15 +0000

The Founding Fathers understood no such thing.
Those founding fathers....understood the importance of separating church and State, keeping "politics out of public schools and church"... and keeping "church out of politics and public schools."


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:

FW: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:35:37 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxxx
To: char.ayers@att.net
Subject: Re: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:08:15 +0000

This Ranter seems straight, but I am only vaguely familiar with James Hartline or his report... seems tabloid like and right of right in partisan politics agenda itself. To call Jim Kelly a Liberal Republican is laughable...he may be just right of the extreme right wing, but that leaves miles of real estate before one can be labeled "A liberal" or even a moderate Republican.
 
Kelly calls the Teachers Union a liberal group, Ha ... the vast majority of teachers in East County are conservative Republicans. Yes, left of Kelly but still far away from liberal. And School Boards are non-partisan elected positions... lest Kelly, Nehring, and their also right wing cohorts Schreiber and Udall wrestle with their war of words and paranoia... leave us be... get on private school boards and out of the public domain! And Bill Wells is a Skyliner... figures... the evangelicals are the power grabbers within themselves.
 
Seems to many that, Kelly, Schreiber, this Hartline person... they all are blind to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from discrimination, and just about every freedom the constitution was meant to provide under TJ's, the Adams's , Franklins', George Washington as they wrote it.  And the lot that wrote the Federalist Papers, thus explained background giving great insight into their intent for our constitution.
 
Those founding fathers were Gods' children, very religious, but they understood the importance of separating church and State, keeping "politics out of public schools and church"... and keeping "church out of politics and public schools."
 
I'm a sensible Christian... floating in hope and grasping at reasonable conservative space... thinking both major political parties are controlled by extremist idiots. I'm appalled at the evangelical infighting that puts Kelly against Schreiber, just an example of evangelical power grabs and their destruction of the Republican party.
 
When does "one nation with liberty and justice for all" become the focus of our citizens' freedoms, and when will the discriminating wrath of the evangelical right understand that they can't mandate their bias on the open minded Christians and other religious denominations? Let God be their only true judge... I certainly can't understand enough to make any sense of their mess at GUHSD.
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
 


 
----- Original Message ----
From: "char.ayers@att.net" <char.ayers@att.net>
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 2:22:26 PM
Subject: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: RE: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:58:55 +0000

Of course it matters who we elect.  T Ryan¢s administration of GUHSD and Prop H was incompetent.  The Board of Trustees proved incompetent too by exercising zero oversight (made abundantly clear by the Bond Advisory Committee¢s Finance Report).
Ryan became superintendent in part by virtue of church connections with trustee Kelly; who also knew Ryan from the undistinguished tenures of both of them in the County Office of Education.   There was no rigorous ¡search¢ process to find a top-notch proven superintendent once Kelly and his cronies Cass and Wells decided Ward Granger had to go.  
Some of the internecine church-connected stuff at play has been reported here: http://jameshartlinereport.blogspot.com/2006/10/san-diegos-political-wars-_116223135418945689.html.   
 

From: char.ayers@att.net [mailto:char.ayers@att.net]
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 10:46 AM
To: Charlene Ayers
Subject: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: char.ayers@att.net
Subject: Re: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:16:31 +0000

Very interesting... "Quantum Meriut... Quasi Contract".  I wonder how this legal concept would apply to Grossmont Union should they end up defaulting on their "Quasi Contract" (Prop H) with the public (voters) promising a new 12th high school?

 

The sad reality (in this case how do you hold a public entity, "GUHSD", responsible for management incompetence) is that courts would likely treat a school district with more latitude than a commercial entity or private business person. Taxpayers would essentially be taking legal action against themselves, since ultimately our taxes pay for their "GUHSD" mismanagement and fiscal irresponsibility!

 

Case in point,"It really does matter who we elect to represent us"... at GUHSD our elected trustees hired Terry Ryan.. who took Prop H from poor planning before he arrived at GUHSD to a state of total collapse during his tenure... and his staff aided and abetted in the cover up, and left overs seem to continue the cover-up post T Ryan... don't figure!

 

Let's trust new Supt. Collins can see the past injustices (incompetence's) and right the "Titanic" of school bond management screw-ups! He seems to be on the right track so far... if time doesn't run out before its' to late to fix things, hmmmm... maybe "Quasi Contract" taxpayer revolt!

 

XxXxXx

  :  )

----- Original Message ----
From: "char.ayers@att.net" <char.ayers@att.net>
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 6:22:23 PM
Subject: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: RE: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:17:17 +0000

Great work Charlene!
Please keep us posted.
I'm certainly rusted up in Latin so I looked up the quantum meruit
phrase.
It seems to bail down to...you screwed someone and now have to pay.
Small wonder with these jerks. Wonder how many more will flare up?
xxxxx
 
 

quantum meruit
 
    
 
 
 
[Latin, As much as is deserved.] In the law of contracts, a doctrine by which the law infers a promise to pay a reasonable amount for labor and materials furnished, even in the absence of a specific legally enforceable agreement between the parties.
A party who performs a valuable service for another party usually enters into a written contract or agreement before performing the service, particularly when the party is in the business of performing that service. For instance, most professional roofers hired to repair a roof insist on having a formal agreement with the owner of the house before beginning the repairs. In the absence of an agreement or formal contract, the roofer may be unable to recover losses in court if the transaction goes awry. Quantum meruit is a judicial doctrine that allows a party to recover losses in the absence of an agreement or binding contract.
By allowing the recovery of the value of labor and materials, quantum meruit prevents the Unj ust Enrichment of the other party. A person would be unjustly enriched if she received a benefit and did not pay for it when fairness required that payment be made. Quantum meruit can be used to address situations where no contract exists or where a contract exists but for some reason is unenforceable. In such cases courts imply a contract to avoid an unjust result. Such contracts are called quasi contracts.
Quantum meruit also describes a method used to determine the exact amount owed to a person. A court may measure this amount either by determining how much the defendant has benefited from the transaction or by determining how much the plaintiff has expended in materials and services.
The doctrine of quantum meruit was developed in the seventeenth century by the royal Court of Chancery in England. This court worked apart from the common-law courts to g rant r elief that was due under general principles of fairness but could not be ob tained under the strict legal prece dents of the common-law courts. The system of basing decisions on basic principles of fairness became known as Equity <http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Equity> . The Chancery Court developed quantum meruit along with other equitable doctrines that allowed a person to recover or collect for other valuable acts performed without a contract, such as the delivery of goods or money. Some of the first cases of quantum meruit involved recovery by persons in so-called trades of common calling, such as innkeepers, tailors, blacksmiths, and tanners.
As service industries increased, so did claims for recovery under quantum meruit, and the doctrine was adopted by colonial courts. U.S. courts now apply quantum meruit principles in a wide variety of cases, including cases involving attorneys' fees, physicians' fee s, con struction work, government contracts, and even domestic rel ations suits for "palimony. " Palimony is a form of financial support that is similar to Alimony <http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Alimony>  but arises out of a nonmarital relationship.
Courts have crafted four basic elements that the plaintiff must prove before she may recover under the doctrine of quantum meruit: (1) that valuable services were rendered; (2) that the services were rendered to the defendant; (3) that the services were accepted, used, and enjoyed by the defendant; and (4) that the defendant was aware that the plaintiff, in performing the services, expected to be paid by the defendant.
The case of Montes v. Naismith and Trevino Construction Co., 459 S.W.2d 691 (Tex. Civ. App. 1970), illustrates how quantum meruit works. In August 1968 Abraham Montes began oral negotiations with Abdon Perez regarding improvements Montes sought for h is homestead. Perez testified that Montes brought a cont ract to him more than once, but that the contract was never complete, and no contract was ever signed. Despite the lack of a contract, Perez arranged for the Naismith and Trevino Construction Company to do the work on Montes's house. Montes paid $1,800 to Perez, and Perez withdrew from the transaction.
Naismith and Trevino made improvements on Montes's homestead for a total value of $3,835.36, but Montes refused to pay for the improvements. Naismith and Trevino brought suit against Montes, arguing that even though they did not have a contract with Montes, they should be paid for their labor and the materials they used in making improvements to his house. The court agreed and entered judgment for Naismith and Trevino in the amount of $1,760, the amount of the services and materials provided by Naismith and Trevino less the amount Montes had paid to Perez. The court based its ruling on the theory of quantum meruit.
T he d oc trine of quantum meruit is contained in court d ecisio ns an d, to a lesser extent, in statutes. It can be a confusing doctrine: many courts mix quantum meruit with the similar principles of restitution and unjust enrichment. Restitution is a broad term that describes measures taken by a civil or criminal defendant to restore a victim to the status that he enjoyed before the defendant caused a loss or injury. Unjust enrichment is an equitable approach to civil relationships that covers more than just contractual situations. A civil plaintiff may recover under the doctrine of unjust enrichment by showing (1) that the plaintiff conferred a benefit on the defendant; (2) that the defendant appreciated or knew of the benefit; and (3) that, under the circumstances, it was unfair for the defendant to accept or retain the benefit without paying for it. Most courts consider quantum meruit a particular form of legal restitution that follows the basic restitutionary principle of preventing un jus t enrichment.
< /TBODY >



From: char.ayers@att.net
To: char.ayers@att.net
Subject: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:45:15 +0000

 

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxxxx
To: "Charlene Ayers" <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: new lawsuit
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:41:54 +0000

 

Lecg, LLC. v. REI-NC, LLC.; Gonya Enterprises, Inc.; Paul Gonya; Kenneth Stroud; David Waitley
4/15/2008 37-2008-00082011 Complaint for breach of contract; promissory fraud; account stated; quantum meruit; declaratory relief. Defendants REI breached the agreement by failing to pay for services rendered by Mack Barclay and Lecg. Defendants have failed to pay the outstanding balance of over $172,000.00
 

 


 



------ End of Forwarded Message

Posted by at No comments:

FW: A mess of it: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 06:11:12 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: A mess of it: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...

Charlene Sez:  Actually, I think our first ranter whose comment is in quotes is correct.
 
To keep the concept of church and state in mind, I always think of Henry VIII.  He had to change his religion to acquire one of his wives, and if Henry, the Catholic, became an Anglican, then EVERYBODY became an Anglican or visa versa.  The Constitutional concept of separation of chuch and state was meant to make that simple; nobody has to change their religion because the King, or the government, says so...and the government better not say so either.  Butt out.
 
In the case of the Grossmont Union High School District, religion and politics have made a mess of it.   It's the kind of thing where both deserve a bad name.
 
 
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: char.ayers@att.net
To: char.ayers@att.net (Charlene Ayers)
Subject: No such thing: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:24:24 +0000


-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: xxxx
To: <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Re: War of words and paranoia: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:55:15 +0000

The Founding Fathers understood no such thing.
Those founding fathers....understood the importance of separating church and State, keeping "politics out of public schools and church"... and keeping "church out of politics and public schools."


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, April 18, 2008

FW: AP: California home prices fall 26 percent amid foreclosures


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:08:26 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: AP: California home prices fall 26 percent amid foreclosures
-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "Karen Gruber" <witchywoman@earthlink.net>
Subject: California home prices fall 26 percent amid foreclosures
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:01:12 +0000


Associated Press 4/17/08
 
 
Karen Gruber
witchywoman@earthlink.net
By Associated Press <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Owner/Local%20Settings/Temp/C9AAC354-D1BE-4847-80A5-305CC536BC94/http://www.forexfactory.com/member.php?u=35334> , Today 6:27pm, Topic Economic Indicators <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Owner/Local%20Settings/Temp/C9AAC354-D1BE-4847-80A5-305CC536BC94/http://www.forexfactory.com/news.php?topics=106>
California home prices fall 26 percent amid foreclosures
SAN DIEGO (AP) - A glut of foreclosed homes helped prompt a 26 percent plunge in California home prices in March, highlighting a trend that experts said is likely to continue as low, introductory interest rates expire for people who bought near the height of the housing boom.

More than 38 percent of California homes sold in March had been foreclosed at some point during the previous year, DataQuick Information Systems said in its survey released Thursday.

Figures for previous years were not immediately available, but company analyst John Karevoll said the March percentage for foreclosed home sales was believed to be an all-time high for the state.

The state's median home price was $358,000 last month, down from $484,000 in March 2007, when the market peaked, DataQuick said. The number of ne w and resale houses and condos sold during the month fell 38.3 percent from a year earlier to 24,565.

DataQuick said the numbers also reflect difficulty in getting financing for expensive homes.

In March 2007, loans over $417,000 accounted for nearly 40 percent of home sales. Last month, those so-called jumbo loans accounted for less than 15 percent of sales.

The percentage of foreclosed homes on the market is growing as many potential sellers hang on to property and wait for prices to rebound.

Foreclosed homes in California sell for about 15 percent less than non-foreclosed homes in the same neighborhoods, bringing all prices down, Karevoll said.

The nationwide foreclosure glut is expected to worsen in May and June as two- and three-year introductory interest rates expire on homes purchased in 2005 and 2006, said Rick Sharga, vice president of marketing at RealtyTrac, a research firm.

As higher rates kick in, few er homeowners will be able make payments, though possible rate cuts by the Federal Reserve may soften the blow, he said.

Nationwide, foreclosed homes have been selling for about 20 percent less than similar non-foreclosed homes, Sharga said.

California housing prices may bottom out in summer or fall, around the same time that foreclosures peak, said Karevoll. Lenders appear to have loosened the spigot in recent months -- a trend that will likely continue into the fall -- though credit will not be as easy to find as it was during the market's heyday, he said.

The big uncertainty is whether the economy will sour even more, making it more difficult for people who lose their jobs to make payments, Karevoll said.

'If we do have a recession in California, things will get bloody out there,' he said.

The affordability of some foreclosed homes has helped some buyers.

Cyndie Schubert, who earns $16.94 an hour as a parking garage attendant, said she b ought a San Diego home out of foreclosure for $250,000 after two years of looking for places that were out of her reach.

The first-time homebuyer had to buy a water heater and kitchen appliances but the plumbing was new.

'I walk to work, I have my white picket fence,' said Schubert, who lives with her 25-year-old daughter. 'It's got a little yard but that's all right.'

Her mortgage payment of $1,104 eats up much of her first monthly paycheck, but it's only $300 more than what she was paying to rent an apartment in a crime-ridden neighborhood where she was raised in suburban El Cajon. She pays her other bills with her second monthly paycheck.

'I got caught up on my bills, and it was time for me to do something,' said Schubert. 'I'm 52. It was time for me to leave (my daughter) some kind of legacy.'

The foreclosure glut has hit California especially hard. The state ranks only behind Nevada -- and just ahead of Florida, Ari zona and Colorado -- in the percentage of households in foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac's March rankings.

California and Arizona are victims of an overheated market in the early part of the decade, when banks lent money for homes that buyers could not afford, said Sharga. Nevada and Florida had lots of speculative buyers.

Los Angeles Neighborhood Housing Services, a nonprofit group, is counseling about 2,000 financially troubled homeowners a month this year, up from about 200 a month during the same period last year, said Lori Gay, chief executive officer.

The group developed a 'triage system' to accommodate the flood of people seeking to avoid foreclosure, Gay said. Previously, the organization worked with people over three or four months, often in classrooms. Now it asks people to tackle questions online and aims to give them quick answers.

'We're expediting in a way that we wouldn't have to before,' Gay said. 'Now there's not a lot of time. They' re up against the wall.'


------ End of Forwarded Message
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)