|
happiegrrrl
Aug 11, 2010, 7:05 PM
Post #126 of 194
(11090 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
SHAWANGUNK CONSERVANCY, INC - 3 cases going back to 1995, 2 of which they are defendant, all of which involve the same parties.
FRIENDS OF THE SHAWANGUNKS, INC. - 1 case, against the town of Gardiner zoning(which CC has maintained, in various posts, that MP is in some sort of cahoots with).
|
|
|
|
|
CapedCrusader
Aug 11, 2010, 7:08 PM
Post #127 of 194
(11086 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2009
Posts: 58
|
Those two cases have greatly destabilized relationships with neighbors. The first because it involved what the judge called fraud. The second case wasn't filed just against the town but also against Werner and Joan Wustrau.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Aug 11, 2010, 7:10 PM
Post #128 of 194
(11082 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
You mean the one with Gardiner? It doesn't list any other party as defendant.
|
|
|
|
|
CapedCrusader
Aug 11, 2010, 7:13 PM
Post #129 of 194
(11079 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2009
Posts: 58
|
The one with Gardiner is the one I mean. I suspect the online database unfortunately doesn't have complete information.
I might go over to the Ulster County Clerk's office again one day next week. If you like, I can give you a ride.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 11, 2010, 8:04 PM
Post #130 of 194
(11052 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
CapedCrusader wrote: The one with Gardiner is the one I mean. I suspect the online database unfortunately doesn't have complete information...
Kent,
I think the search engine that I linked to only lists NYS Superior Court cases for the various counties. So, perhaps if other cases do exist, they are filed in some different jurisdiction?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Aug 11, 2010, 8:30 PM
Post #131 of 194
(11038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
CapedCrusader wrote: From the Moody Blues ...
Forget possting messages that get people riled up - that should be a banzing offence.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 11, 2010, 8:49 PM
Post #132 of 194
(11029 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
CapedCrusader wrote: Perhaps the lasting mark Juan de Fuca has made on climbing forums is the suspicion that everything is a troll. From the Moody Blues Cold-hearted orb that rules the night Removes the colours from our sight Red is grey and yellow white But we decide which is right And which is an illusion
No need to blame JDF. MPNA is quite responsible enough for the doubts that are built up around him/her/it.
From the same song: "Some try to tell me, thoughts they cannot defend..."
GO
|
|
|
|
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc.
Aug 12, 2010, 6:28 PM
Post #133 of 194
(10967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2010
Posts: 38
|
Hey Jim,
Sorry it took me so long to get back to you, but we were trying to locate some documents that were specific to your question which I will post later today. So to begin with, If you look at our initial post, we state that we are advocacy group for adjacent neighbors of the Mohonk Preserve, and in the event of a dispute we can offer help in retaining legal representation, surveyors, documents etc.. Since the Mountain house is unlikely to ever be sued by the Mohonk Preserve it is unlikely that they would ever need to consult us. The MPNA does not "represent" neighbors but offers help in the event of a dispute. In fact, three of our founders (no Kent was not there) were at the Rosendale Town Board meeting, as well as a private meeting last night in support of a landowner whose property access allegedly was taken away from them by OSI and the Town of Rosendale (The Waterworks Parcel project). This piece of property has been in their family for over 200 years and there is now a lawsuit in the works.
The MPNA understands that legally speaking the Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve are different entities, it is our belief that the Mountain house has a lot of influence over what the Mohonk Preserve does, and in fact have jointly sued their neighbors.
Thanks,
The Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association
|
|
|
|
|
jimlawyer
Aug 12, 2010, 7:14 PM
Post #134 of 194
(10950 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 10, 2002
Posts: 20
|
MPNA: Thanks for the reply.
So, you have grouped (at least in some cases) the Hotel and the Preserve. Fair enough. What are the specific cases where the Hotel and the Preserve have joined together in a malicious (in your view) lawsuit against a neighbor? Did you post those already? Perhaps I missed that.
Do you think it is disingenuous to group the actions of the Hotel (ridgeline blemishes, continued development, etc.) in your list of grievances against the Preserve? In a hidden way, you are using the Hotel's actions to stack the deck against the Preserve, when in fact it is a different entity.
So, again, I ask why your call-to-action is limited to a boycott of the Preserve. Why not include the Hotel? While you're at it, since you brought it up, why aren't you including the OSI and the town of Rosendale?
About your organization: you say that your group offers help to Preserve neighbors with disputes involving the Preserve. Did these neighbors ask for your group to reach out on climber forums to ask for a call-to-action against the Preserve? This seems to fall outside of your stated mission of "retaining legal representation, surveyors, documents etc" for neighbors. It's one thing to help the neighbors, it's another thing to organize a public campaign against a non-profit entity, one that offers a world-class, unique-to-the-planet climbing venue to the very people whom you're asking for action.
Are you the actual neighbors, or some third party helping the neighbors?
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Aug 12, 2010, 8:03 PM
Post #135 of 194
(10931 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc. wrote: This piece of property has been in their family for over 200 years and there is now a lawsuit in the works.
As someone with no dog in the fight, I want to say, I get your emotion. If I lived next to someone who was a suing douchenozzle (either a person or organization), I too might reach out to other neighbors to see if the lawsuit happh neighbor could be blocked into irrelavancy.
However, because of the difference between personal stakes in the game, fallacies of relavance only amplify the emmotion and cause bigger gaps in the discussion.
What am I supposed to think? 200 years makes the land more or less valuable? That the current occupant is a long standing family in the community or a lazy bastard who inherited their riches? In the end, I'm left with the impression that the inclusion of irrelevant data for the attempt to insite emotion means that the presenter has a weak arguement.
That may not be the impression you are trying to make, but it is one that I am getting.
|
|
|
|
|
ClimbClimb
Aug 12, 2010, 10:28 PM
Post #136 of 194
(10912 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 389
|
johnwesely wrote: If anything, I think they should be using more predatory practices. I am sorry you can't parcel off your land and turn it into a subdivision.
Climbing access is important, but so are private property rights... I'm not sure what is or isn't going on here, legally, but I bet you don't know the facts, either.
|
|
|
|
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc.
Aug 13, 2010, 3:11 AM
Post #137 of 194
(10886 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2010
Posts: 38
|
Here is the decision for Index#77-226 from 2003
http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2415.jpg
http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2416.jpg
http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2417.jpg
http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2418.jpg
http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2419.jpg
Take a close look at the Plaintiff's on the last page. Mohonk Preserve, and Smiley Bros. Inc.(mountain house), as well as the names that appear on the current Mohonk Preserve board, Sara S. Senior (former President of MP), Rachel S Matteson, A. Keith Smiley etc... Together these "separate" corporations sued their neighbors. This case is from 1977!
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Aug 13, 2010, 3:18 AM
Post #138 of 194
(10883 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc. wrote: Here is the decision for Index#77-226 from 2003 http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2415.jpg http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2416.jpg http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2417.jpg http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2418.jpg http://i921.photobucket.com/albums/ad55/mohonkpreserveneighborsassociation/IMG_2419.jpg Take a close look at the Plaintiff's on the last page. Mohonk Preserve, and Smiley Bros. Inc.(mountain house), as well as the names that appear on the current Mohonk Preserve board, Sara S. Senior (former President of MP), Rachel S Matteson, A. Keith Smiley etc... Together these "separate" corporations sued their neighbors. This case is from 1977! |
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 13, 2010, 3:44 AM
Post #139 of 194
(10872 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
ClimbClimb wrote: johnwesely wrote: If anything, I think they should be using more predatory practices. I am sorry you can't parcel off your land and turn it into a subdivision. Climbing access is important, but so are private property rights... I'm not sure what is or isn't going on here, legally, but I bet you don't know the facts, either.
If private property rights means turning a priceless resource into subdivision then you can count me out.
Disclaimer: I don't know for certain that the MPNA wants to turn the Gunks into a subdivision.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 13, 2010, 3:47 AM
Post #140 of 194
(10870 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
For convenience, I have made the files "clickable."
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 13, 2010, 3:55 AM
Post #141 of 194
(10867 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
johnwesely wrote: ClimbClimb wrote: johnwesely wrote: If anything, I think they should be using more predatory practices. I am sorry you can't parcel off your land and turn it into a subdivision. Climbing access is important, but so are private property rights... I'm not sure what is or isn't going on here, legally, but I bet you don't know the facts, either. If private property rights means turning a priceless resource into subdivision then you can count me out. Disclaimer: I don't know for certain that the MPNA wants to turn the Gunks into a subdivision.
This is confusing enough, so let's not make it any more confusing. There are two separate issues that landowners in the Gunks have raised here at RC.com.
1) The first was posted some time ago by Kent (CapedCrusader) and the issue was related to devaluation of his property and the property of others near the Shawangunk ridge due to a rezoning measure passed by the town of Gardiner, NY.
2) The second is the focus of this thread, in which the issue is the supposed use of litigation by the Mohonk Preserve against its neighbors.
I don't think (but I'm not sure) that these two issues are related--except that some of the parties are the same.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Aug 13, 2010, 5:10 AM
Post #142 of 194
(10853 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
You want us to take you seriously, yet you can't figure out the basics of your scanning software to rotate the image 90 degrees so we can read it? Really?
So the MP sued. Frankly the land would have fared far better in the hands of MP than the neglect shown by the other owners. There was talk in the late 70's of simply burning the place down to remove the noisy bikers party hang-out.
Again, Pardini & Frank was a *single case* from our stand point, even if it did go to court several times with suit and counter-suit. So in 60 years we've got this one case. You'll need to show us another good dozen or more *separate* cases to support your allegation of a "pattern of abuse".
(This post was edited by marc801 on Aug 13, 2010, 5:21 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
seismopaul
Aug 13, 2010, 7:30 AM
Post #143 of 194
(10841 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2010
Posts: 2
|
Dear MPNA,
Why don't you post a more relevant case, namely this current one:
Court: Ulster Civil Supreme
Index Number: 002747/2009
Upstate Index Number: 09-2747
Case Name: MOHONK PRESERVE, INC. vs. ULLRICH, CHRISTOPHER E., SARAH C.EMOND,
Case Type: Other Real Property
Track: Standard
RJI Filed: 08/31/2009
Upstate RJI Number: 55-09-01628
Date NOI Due:
NOI Filed: 03/02/2010
Disposition Deadline: 06/03/2011
Disposition Date:
Calendar Number: 55-09-01628
Jury Status: Non-Jury
Justice Name: HON. MARY M. WORK,
Hmmm, let me think why you wouldn't post that one....because its bogus what the landowner (Ullrich) is trying to pull off in their own manipulations of the border with the preserve and why the judge seems to be on the verge of ruling in favor of the plaintiff.
|
|
|
|
|
CapedCrusader
Aug 13, 2010, 1:35 PM
Post #144 of 194
(10809 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2009
Posts: 58
|
I can't speak for MPNA but the Mohonk Preserve vs Ullrich trial doesn't start for months, so how is it possible that "the judge seems to be on the verge of ruling in favor of the plaintiff"?
And Curt, regarding your question about jurisdictions upthread, I don't know. If I get to the County Clerk's office again sometime I'll speak with the clerk to find out why some cases show up in the clerk's database but not in the state's online database.
|
|
|
|
|
seismopaul
Aug 13, 2010, 4:36 PM
Post #145 of 194
(10756 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2010
Posts: 2
|
Lets read the brief or motion by the judge, if someone has it available to post. MPNA, I suspect you do if you are assisting folks in this regard. I had a copy sent to me a while ago, but have since deleted it. I forget what it was exactly, but it seemed to be an injunction of some sort related to this case.
If you read that document, you will get the sense that the defendant is stonewalling, in violation, and the plaintiff is in the right. IMHO.
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
MohonkNeighborsassoc.
Aug 17, 2010, 1:42 AM
Post #146 of 194
(10625 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2010
Posts: 38
|
jimlawyer wrote: MPNA: Thanks for the reply. So, you have grouped (at least in some cases) the Hotel and the Preserve. Fair enough. What are the specific cases where the Hotel and the Preserve have joined together in a malicious (in your view) lawsuit against a neighbor? Did you post those already? Perhaps I missed that. Do you think it is disingenuous to group the actions of the Hotel (ridgeline blemishes, continued development, etc.) in your list of grievances against the Preserve? In a hidden way, you are using the Hotel's actions to stack the deck against the Preserve, when in fact it is a different entity. So, again, I ask why your call-to-action is limited to a boycott of the Preserve. Why not include the Hotel? While you're at it, since you brought it up, why aren't you including the OSI and the town of Rosendale? About your organization: you say that your group offers help to Preserve neighbors with disputes involving the Preserve. Did these neighbors ask for your group to reach out on climber forums to ask for a call-to-action against the Preserve? This seems to fall outside of your stated mission of "retaining legal representation, surveyors, documents etc" for neighbors. It's one thing to help the neighbors, it's another thing to organize a public campaign against a non-profit entity, one that offers a world-class, unique-to-the-planet climbing venue to the very people whom you're asking for action. Are you the actual neighbors, or some third party helping the neighbors?
Hey Jim,
I hope this answers your Q's:
1. Please stop donations or write a letter stating your disapproval for these specific tactics but ONLY when the two current court cases are decided upon, and only if they are in favor of the Defendants. If Mohonk successfully sues it's neighbors, wins the cases, keep donating as usual. We have presented documents that we feel represent an ugly side of the Mohonk Preserve. We also feel there is not quite enough yet to say "Stop Donating Now". We feel the two current court cases represent a pivotal point, so we are waiting for those decisions. In the interim we have many more documents that we will be posting.
2. No, not specifically on a climber forums. This forum is only a small focus for us and it's our goal to reach out to significant user groups of the Mohonk Preserve.
3.Obviously the MPNA wants this kind of behavior by the Mohonk Preserve to stop. We feel this behavior hurts M.P., climbers and other MP users. Due to these tactics many landowners are unwilling to give land to the preserve which impacts the size of the MP.
4. We are actual neighbors.
Thanks,
The Mohonk Preserve Neighbors Association
|
|
|
|
|
BigE
Aug 17, 2010, 2:45 AM
Post #147 of 194
(10604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 17, 2010
Posts: 5
|
People from Georgia really are ignorant!
For those of us "in" the community, whom have moved here for the beauty of the area, not just to pave the land and club baby seals! It's disheartening to see such a beneficial organization cause such problems with it's neighbors. It seems everyone wants to put there sights on a few more public cases, but there are many other sad instances of bullying by the Preserve. But not everyone wants to air the dirty laundry, and for good reason.
"Not all is idyllic in the small logging town of Lumberton." Blue Velvet 1986.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 17, 2010, 3:03 AM
Post #148 of 194
(10597 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
BigE wrote: People from Georgia really are ignorant!
Thanks. I am glad you joined the forum to perpetuate a stereotype.
|
|
|
|
|
BigE
Aug 17, 2010, 3:12 AM
Post #149 of 194
(10592 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 17, 2010
Posts: 5
|
This ideology of " I like the preserve and climbing, fuck it's neighbors and take there land" is like saying "I like my gas sucking SUV fuck Iraq, bomb the shit out of them."
I hope you don't don't go through life with such ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 17, 2010, 3:14 AM
Post #150 of 194
(10591 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
BigE wrote: This ideology of " I like the preserve and climbing, fuck it's neighbors and take there land" is like saying "I like my gas sucking SUV fuck Iraq, bomb the shit out of them." I hope you don't don't go through life with such ignorance.
It is exactly like that. Thanks for illuminating me and saving me from my backwards Southern ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
