Internal Memo: Subdivision Easements Law Regarding Mr. Jones

In reviewing the case against Mr. Al Jones three natural lawsuits nuclear number 18 pending against him. The source has been put frontward by the metropolis. This suit contends that Mr. Jones knowingly out of sight culture regarding a utility easement on a line where Mr. Jones? company is constructing a residential sub-division. In cover this culture the urban center maintains that Mr. Jones has committed lampoon. The second and third suits are from a resident alien owner of the next retention to the site of the sub-division. This owner?s claim is that Mr. Jones trespassed on his topographic superlative and in so doing earn damage. This memorandum will allocate that Mr. Jones is innocent of the charge of fraud. The facts will also show that although Mr. Jones did cause damage to the adjacent property he did non trespass. The pricy word in all cases is various types of settlements with both the city and the adjacent property owner. The charges associated with t his case involve state and topical anaesthetic laws. As a result each of the suits levied against Mr. Jones do not incline for national courts. The charge of fraud brought by the city is link to the concealment of the utility easement. As the fraud is expressage to the city and does not cross state boundaries no federal law have been broken. Indications are that the case of fraud was not criminal.

?Since fraud is intended to employ dishonesty to deprive some other of money, property or a right, it can also be a crime for which the fraudulent person(s) can be charged, time-tested and convicted? (dictionary.law.co m, 2008). In this case Mr. Jones is not depr! iving the city of money, property, or rights. In fact, by building the sub-division the city may receive probable income from extra property taxes for improvements on the land. This case... If you want to get a exuberant essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay