Many Community Associations prepare to open their neighborhood pool by adding chemicals and performing maintenance to ensure the health and safety of the Owners. But just as HOAs take care in measuring chlorine and skimming leaves, Boards of Directors are well-advised to take care in preparing the Association’s Pool Rules. This blog post reviews the possible “rules” that HOAs may implement for pool safety.
Originally posted 2013-09-16 18:01:17. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
Readers of our website may notice that we list “Estate Administration” as an area of our practice. We assist executors of wills, or personal representatives of estates to properly dispose of a decedent’s assets.
Occasionally, we get involved in cases in which a party contests a decedent’s Will that has been probated with the court. Typically, that person will claim that another Will should be considered the proper Will because the most recent Will was either
- made when the decedent lacked the mental capacity at the time the Will was made, or
- the most recent Will was made under the undue influence by a person who held a position of trust and confidence with the decedent.
In the case of Weedon v. Weedon, an older woman with a diagnosis of multiple myeloma revised her Will in 2007. Prior to surgery in 2008, she decided to revise her Will again. As part of the revisions, the testatrix decided to bequest all of her real property to just one of her five children (who had also taken the role of caregiver for her mother). Four days after signing the new Will (and three days after surgery), the decedent died. After the will was probated, the remaining four children sued their sister seeking an order that either their mother lacked the mental capacity to make the revised Will; or that the revised Will was made as a result of their sister’s undue influence.
The King George Circuit Court determined that the decedent lacked the testamentary capacity when she executed the Will and that the Will was the result of undue influence, but the Virginia Supreme Court reversed. In this blog post, we examine the direction given by the Virginia Supreme Court in determining whether a decedent had the mental capacity at the time the Will was made.
Originally posted 2011-03-15 09:00:12. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
[youtube PTMt5iVhobs nolink]
There are many questions to ask and many issues to resolve when you decide to start your Virginia business entity. The time to ask those questions and resolve those issues is before you enter into your business agreement.
Neal’s 3-minute slideshow presentation gives an a brief primer on the forms of entities that are available and questions to start your dialog with your business attorney and business partners. This slideshow combines basic information with more advanced concepts for the more experienced entrepreneur.
Tarley Robinson, PLC, Attorneys and Counsellors at Law
Originally posted 2010-09-23 05:35:17. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
In a case from the Chesterfield Circuit Court, the circuit court judge determined that a homeowner could not be forced to pay association dues to a voluntary association. This result is not surprising.
Originally posted 2012-04-11 06:34:29. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
I read a story in the Virginia-Pilot in which it described an incident of Citizen’s Arrest. In the story, a fire inspector, using a flashing blue light on his car, stopped a female driver. He claimed the driver had been swerving, and he stopped her because of his concern she may have been drinking.
A Suffolk, Virginia detective witnessed the incident. After consultation with fellow police officers, the police department urged the Commonwealth’s Attorney to press charges against the fire inspector for impersonating an officer.
The Commonwealth’s Attorney declined. He cited a Virginia case, Hudson v. Commonwealth, for the legal principle that private citizens have a common law right to make a “Citizen’s Arrest.”
I will not go into all of the other complicating legal issues relating to a Citizen’s Arrest, like what obligations does a person have to obey the citizen making the arrest, what force can the citizen use to make the arrest, etc. No, my purpose is more of humorous nature, because the incident reminded me of my childhood, watching Mayberry RFD. In this particular episode, Gomer Pyle shows the proper way to make a Citizen’s Arrest of Deputy Barney Fife:
Tarley Robinson, PLC, Attorneys and Counsellors at Law
Part 2 on Virginia’s Unauthorized Practice of Law Rules and HOAs – What is considered the unauthorized practice of law?
Originally posted 2013-01-08 07:00:01. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
We blogged previously about finding guidance in Virginia’s rules on the unauthorized practice of law as they pertain to community associations. In this post, we will review Virginia opinions that address whether certain work performed by managers is the unauthorized practice of law (“UPL”).
Originally posted 2010-06-18 12:30:24. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
Though the majority of businesses in the United States are sole proprietorships, those of you who read an earlier post know that I recommend, for a myriad of good reasons, that an entity of some kind be placed between a person doing business and the rest of the world. Find an experienced business attorney to help establish your business entity.
In this post, I address briefly the general partnership form of business entity, the only form I consider more dangerous to the financial health of an individual than the sole proprietorship. Why, you ask? Because with the sole proprietorship, the sole proprietor is personally liable for the acts of the sole proprietor, the business and the business employees. In the general partnership, the partners are personally liable for the acts of the business, the employees and each other. What partners do can be fairly unpredictable, like contracting to purchase or lease things that cannot possibly be paid for out of the profits of the business, or like contracting to do that which cannot possibly be done profitably.
Originally posted 2011-07-05 09:05:23. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
Flying the flag is an important way that Americans celebrate their liberty and the sacrifices of past and present heroes who defend it. There were news stories about a dispute between an Ohio homeowners’ association and a Vietnam veteran over a flagpole that brought an important issue to the forefront.
In Ohio, a homeowner erected a large flagpole on his property to fly the flag. The homeowners’ association told him that the flagpole (not the flag) violated the declaration of covenants for the neighborhood, and asked him to take the flagpole down. It offered to place flagpoles in common areas in the neighborhood, and suggested that the covenants would allow him to fly a flag on a pole attached to his house. He refused. After a firestorm of publicity, the HOA averted litigation by permitting the homeowner to keep his flagpole. The underlying question remains: can a homeowners’ association really prohibit an owner from flying the American Flag?
Originally posted 2010-09-20 21:56:35. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
It is relatively routine for developers or “declarants” to include arbitration provisions into the declaration of restrictive covenants recorded to establish a common interest community. Generally, arbitration clauses are preferred by developers for a variety of reasons including avoiding a jury and having a say in the choice of the fact-finder. However, those decisions made by the developers have long lasting effects upon homeowner boards following transition, because it is difficult for a board to effect a change in the documents.
Originally posted 2011-04-13 17:44:17. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
We have written on the issues that arise when employees use their work computer for personal business. In that blog article, we referred to a California case in which an appellate court ruled that an employee’s emails to her attorney were not protected by the attorney-client privilege because the company had a written policy that informed employees that computers were not to be used for personal matters, that emails could be monitored to ensure that employees complied with the policy, and that employees should not expect any privacy in the use of their computers.
In local news, former Delegate Phil Hamilton raised a “marital privilege” objection to the use at trial of emails he sent to his wife. Certain communications to and from a spouse can be protected from disclosure. There were complicating factors to this case’s analysis.