Homeowners' Association Sues To Oust 3-Year-Old
Child with drug-addict mom lives with grandparents in community that bans persons under age 18:
LARGO, Fla. -- A Florida homeowners group wants 3-year-old Kimberly Broffman to take her Big Wheel and hit the road.My Comments:
They've banded together to oust the toddler from their Tampa-area community, which bans residents under 18.
The child's grandparents, Judie and Jimmy Stottler, admit Kimberly's been living there in violation of homeowners' association rules for three years. They said her mother has a drug problem, and isn't capable of caring for the child.
The grandparents said they live on a fixed income and can't afford to move until they sell their house. So far, there have been no takers to buy their house, even after they lowered the $189,000 asking price by $10,000 six months ago.
They also said they can't afford to hire an attorney.
Judie Stottler supports the family with her $18,000-per year dishwashing job because Jimmy Stottler is disabled and is unable to work.
[More]
Courts sometimes will rule that certain restrictive covenants are invalid as against public policy. For example, race restrictive covenants have been ruled unlawful for such reasons. I'm sorta surprised that age restrictive covenants aren't similarly invalid, since they discriminate against families.
At the very least, it should be against public policy for grouchy old farts to wall themselves off from the rest of the world where they can sit around and bitch about having to pay taxes to "educate other people's kids".
Of course, if I were a judge and it were up to me, I'd invalidate ALL homeowners' associations because it should be against public policy for megalomaniacal @$$holes to act like neighborhood Napoleans, coming into your yard with a tape measure to gauge the length of your grass, the dimensions of your flag, or the height of your flagpole (not to mention the age of your child or grandchild).
Labels: Communists, Families, Humor, Law, What the ****?
posted by Pro Ecclesia 8:41 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
ISTR a Supreme Court case in the 80s that invalidated a housing restriction that prevented people from outside the nuclear family living together. IIRC, it also involved a grandmother taking care of grandchildren.
Agreed on restrictive covenants: it's the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, with all the pettiness that involves. Here's hoping someone steps up and does the pro se thing for this family.
That was one of the cases I was thinking of, Dale.
My cousin's grandson runs drug treatment centers. An old friend was chairman of a zoning hearing board. They both always said that very few zoning restrictions could stand up to a serious court challenge. The problem is that the people who have the problems can rarely afford a good lawyer.
And watch the remarks about "grouchy old farts". I'm one myself, but that doesn't mean I don't like kids. How about "Ebenezer Scrooge wannabes"?
Dude, you and I should never get together to talk about homeowners' associations, because once we got going there'd be no stopping us and we'd die of sheer irate exhaustion.
Post a Comment
<< Home