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

FW: Political fortunes: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 23:07:30 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Political fortunes: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)

-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: PatsyFritz@aol.com
To: tanya.mannes@uniontrib.com
Cc: char.ayers@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: RE: RE: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:42:27 +0000

In a message dated 4/18/8 8:57:29 PM, tanya.mannes@uniontrib.com writes:

<< The funny thing is, Steve Castaneda IS a Republican and always has been!
(But he has never gotten the GOP endorsement.) >>

Yes, but there's a difference between Republican and "Downtown Establishment
Republican." Bonnie's been a Republican for some time (I don't think "for
life," having met her parents) but at least by the time she realized she'd be
facing the re-election process (once she was on the bench), she was a
Republican.


In her first race for DA, her opponent (the sleazeful Paul Pfingst) got the
endorsement of the Lin coln Club, Republican Central Committee - and the U-T);
Bonnie got nuttin'. That was changed once she won and she is now careful to
stay on the establishment's side. Local in-power Republicans do NOT want a
maverick! They want someone they can control - or, better yet, someone who
knows what's expected and simply performs accordingly.

The fact that Steve worked for Ron never helped him, because the es
tablishment was scornful of Roberts for years. Now that Roberts is locked in
that office as long as he wants it, AND gets full support from the BIA, Ron's
acceptable to the Lincoln Club and Central Committee.

Of course, if Steve's name was "Steve Caldwell," his political fortunes would
be entirely different today ...

Patsy




------ End of Forwarded Message

FW: Cheryl-Greg connection: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:19:45 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Cheryl-Greg connection: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)


-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: PatsyFritz@aol.com
To: tanya.mannes@uniontrib.com, char.ayers@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Re: RE: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:44:23 +0000



In a message dated 4/17/8 11:36:08 PM, tanya.mannes@uniontrib.com writes:

<< Dear Patsy,


Thanks for your comments. Given your knowledge of Cheryl-Greg connection, you
might find this story interesting. It was published in May 2007.


Tanya Mannes

DELICIOUS, Tanya! I had not read this report (below). It did not show up in
our North County Inland edition. What we have here, I think, is the effort
to curry favor by Dumanis, and the Supes' quid-pro-quo for her support during
their election campaigns.

I have wondered why th e Lincoln Club and Republican Central Committee are not
shown as "friends of the court" in O'Toole's capers. I see this as Bonnie
sucking up not only to the Supes, but to the downtown Republican establishment.
She's been a Republican for some time (prior to her first race for DA) but
for obvious reasons needs to burnish her Republican rep to get the downtown
establishment's support.

I truly regret the time, $$$ and effort I put into that race, garnering votes
in North County for Dumanis. I was S0 idealistic about Bonnie, but she's
turned into just another run-of-the mill influence peddler - for her own
interests. Sad! She could have been a real force for ethics and reform!

Patsy




Newspaper: UNION-TRIBUNE

Date: May 12, 2007

Day of Week: Saturday

Edition: R,E,S,F

Section: LOCAL

Page: B-1

Length (in lines): 785

Headline: Castaneda says DA probes are ploy | `Unsubs tantiated charges,' he
claims

Byline: Tanya Mannes

Credit: STAFF WRITER

Captions: Published: 1. Steve Castaneda 2. Patrick O'Toole



Town: CHULA VISTA

Keywords: CHULA VISTA. COUNTY. ELECTIONS. ETHICS. HOUSING. PROBES.



[Go To Best Hit]


CHULA VISTA -- Chula Vista City Councilman Steve Castaneda said yesterday

that District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis investigated him three times in the

last year to try to force him to resign.


Castaneda contends that Dumanis conspired with Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl

Cox, his opponent in last year's election. Castaneda hasn't stated an

intention to challenge Cox in the next mayoral race, but many expect him

to do so.


In a statement e-mailed to the media, Castaneda said Patrick O'Toole, who

leads the Public Integrity Unit at the District Attorney's Office, began

targeting him in March 2006 in a "politica l witch hunt."


Castaneda said O'Toole initiated three investigations of him and

subpoenaed him three times to testify before the criminal grand jury

regarding "completely unsubstantiated charges raised by political

opponents with deep political connections."


"I'm up for re-election in 2008, and I'm sure that the Coxes and their

political allies would like nothing better than for me to run with a cloud

over my head or flat-out resign," Castaneda said.


He said O'Toole recently offered him a choice: Step down from office

immediately or he would charge him with a felony. Castaneda said his

attorney advised him not to comment further on the deal, including what

the felony charge would be.


Castaneda said the lengthy, expensive process of fighting a felony charge

would take a toll on his family's reputation and his career -- even if he

prevailed in court.


"The DA knows this, and they are leveraging that reality in an attempt to

achieve the political outcome they seek," he said.


Castaneda said Dumanis is part of the county's "old power structure" that

includes Cheryl Cox's husband, county Supervisor Greg Cox, who has budget

authority over the District Attorney's Office, he said.


O'Toole declined to comment on Castaneda's allegations.


"We don't comment on investigations or the status of grand jury matters,"

he said.


Dumanis also declined to comment, according to her spokesman, Paul

Levikow.


Last year, Cheryl Cox and Castaneda ran in the Chula Vista mayoral primary

in an effort to unseat incumbent Mayor Steve Padilla. Castaneda received

25 percent of the votes in the June 6 primary, which wasn't enough for him

to proceed to the runoff. Cox won in November.


Cox said yesterday that Castaneda's alleg ations came as a surprise.


"I don't know what he's talking about," she said.


She said she considers Castaneda a colleague, not a rival, and noted that

both share the goal of demolishing the South Bay Power Plant.


"The race with me and Steve was over in June," Cox said.


Castaneda said O'Toole's three investigations focused on an apartment that

Castaneda rented for his wife in Sunbow Villas; property that he purchased

in 2005 with Chula Vista resident Henry Barros; and his role as a board

member of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corp.


Castaneda has been a City Council member since 2004. He is a

transportation and land-use consultant who was once an aide to Ron

Roberts, the former San Diego councilman who is now a county supervisor.



"I am not a wealthy man, and this pretense has cost me personally

thousands of dollars in legal fees, not to say what it has cost the

taxpayers," Castaneda said.


He said he has spent $15,000 on attorney fees, and the city hired council

for him and other city officials who were forced to testify in the

investigations.


Shortly after his announcement was sent out, Castaneda attempted to remove

one statement in it. In a subsequent e-mail, he said that the news release

should not have stated that O'Toole threatened to charge him with a felony

if he didn't resign. The information is true, but it "may be deemed

privileged," he said.


Dumanis established the Public Integrity Unit in early 2006 to root out

public corruption involving violations of state law in San Diego County.



Last year, O'Toole began using the county's criminal grand jury early in

his investigations as a fact-finding body. The grand jury has the

authority to issue subpoenas, and witnesses testify under oath.


Previously in San Diego County, the criminal grand jury was presented with

the results of a district attorney's investigation as a final step in

getting an indictment. Now the grand jury gets involved much earlier,

before prosecutors have determined whether any crime was committed.


O'Toole is a former federal prosecutor who previously served as the U.S.

attorney in San Diego. He developed the new procedure based in part on the

federal model and on procedures used in Los Angeles and Santa Clara

counties, he said.


The criminal grand jury has 19 members. A new group is convened every 30

days, selected by lot from the trial-juror pool. Jurors' identities are

kept confidential.


End-of-Story







-----Original Message-----

From: PatsyFritz@aol.com [mailto:PatsyFritz@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 4:29 PM

To: char.ayers@att.ne t; Mannes, Tanya

Subject: Re: SDUT-Mannes: Councilman emotional as he testifies during

perjury trial (Castaneda persecution)




In a message dated 4/17/8 5:20:28 PM, char.ayers@att.net writes:


<< Castaneda has described O'Toole's investigation as a "political witch

hunt" intended to prevent him from winning re-election. He said last year
that

District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, O'Toole's boss, sought to damage his
reputation

and help his rival, Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox.


Dumanis has declined to comment on those statements. >>



Tanya -


.... Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox, wife of County Board of Supervisors

Chairman Greg Cox. The Board of Supervisors provides the District
Attorney's

generous budget, including the allocation of a disproportionate amount of
Prop 172

funding while shafting Fire Departments in the County who get n ada, zero, zip

to protect the electorate.


The 1993 vote for Proposition 172's tax increase was clearly successful ONLY

because votes watched TV coverage of horrendous brushfires raging through

populated areas from Oakland to Malibu to the US-Mexican border, just days
befoe

the election.


Name one voter who thought the tax should pay so much for the DA's office and

none for fire protection!


But the Supervisors always need the endorsement of the D.A. and the Sheriff

at election time, to prove they're "tough on crime!" Hence the lavish
budget

enhancements for the D.A. and Sheriff.


So ... why shouldn't the D.A's "McGruff," Patrick O'Toole, go after Mayor

Cox's rival, Castaneda, and curry favor with the Supes who butter his bread,

especially Mayor Cox's husband, now Chairman of the Board of Supes?


I guess it's the least he could do ...


Pa tsy Fritz >>




**************
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for
U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.

(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)


------ End of Forwarded Message

FW: Of course!: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:22:26 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
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 Œsearch‚ 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 Unjust 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 precedents 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 relations 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 decisio ns and, 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.



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


FW: GrossmontUHSD application?: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:46:16 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
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
Unjust 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 obtained under the strict legal precedents 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 relations 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 contract 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 decisions and, 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.






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

FW: Guidestar: Don't Take Chances - Identify Supporting Organizations


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:47:32 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
Subject: Guidestar: Don't Take Chances - Identify Supporting Organizations


-------------- 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%2BCh> <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%2B>  
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-%2BOpti> <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-mai>  .

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-%2BOpti> <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-mai>  .
 <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%2BCh> <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%2B>  
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

FW: Quatum Meruit: Alpine's finest sued again...


------ Forwarded Message
From: <char.ayers@att.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 01:22:23 +0000
To: Charlene Ayers <char.ayers@att.net>
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
   
OResults=1;kw='In quantum meruit' ad_channel="6223334685"; AdsNum=3; OriginalURL="http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/quantum+meruit"; google_page_url=OriginalURL; google_max_num_ads = '20'; google_num_radlinks = '10'; google_max_radlink_len = '17'; window.onerror=myerror; google_kw ="In quantum meruit";google_afs_query = google_kw; google_afs_ad = 'w6'; google_afs_client = "pub-2694630391511205"; google_afs_channel = '1506981298'; google_afs_adsafe = 'high'; google_afs_ie = "iso-8859-1"; google_afs_oe = "iso-8859-1"; kw = google_kw; g_kw=1; google_encoding="iso-8859-1"; google_ad_channel=ad_channel; write_ads(AdsNum, 0)  
wld_ask()  
[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 Unjust 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 grant r elief that was due under general principles of fairness but could not be obtained under the strict legal precedents 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' fees, con struction work, government contracts, and even domestic relations 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 contract 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.
The doc trine of quantum meruit is contained in court decisions and, 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 unjus t enrichment.






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