     |
|
|
|
Detailed market commentary at The Market Ticker and Ticker Classics
(The Year 2012 In Review) Donations accepted; we offer GOLD ACCESS for enhanced privileges. T-Shirts, caps, coffee mugs? Click here. BlogTalkRadio - Mondays at 3:30 Central - Yes, TickerGuy has a radio show (kinda)  RSS available
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
|
||
| MarketTicker Forums Single Post Display (Show in context) |
User: Not logged on
|
| Top | Login | Control Panel | FAQ | Register | Logout |
| User Info | Goodnight Banks: Arizona; entered at 2011-02-15 13:29:34 | |||
|
Gamma Posts: 5580 Registered: 2008-01-20 Northern CA 
|
Quote:Sorry, won't work. State Property law pre-dates the Federal Government. Careful about that, Karl. AZ and NM have various laws that date from their status as territories, which ended, I believe, in 1912 with their statehood. I was peripherally involved in a property dispute in Santa Fe, and there were aspects of how property laws worked that were glaringly different from CA. I don't know and don't pretend to know enough about the details, but AZ and NM be different from all other states in certain arcane property laws (Who knows, they might be more *stingent* in these cases....I don't know) (add) And, my comment characterizing & anticipating the banks' objections...the banks will not claim UCC "overthrow", they will claim "adequacy", eg; is party "A" and part "B" agree that scratching something into the bark of that tree over there, then for those parties, the action is adequate. Last modified: 2011-02-15 13:34:42 by gamma
| |||