From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Thu Jul 10 2003 - 18:17:40 MDT
Randy S wrote:
> Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal@smigrodzki.org> said:
>
>> Lee Corbin wrote:
>>
>>> But now Rafal has written
>>>
>>>> ### Persons of disagreeable disposition (such as you assume this
>>>> girl must be) can be asked to leave one's house. Nobody "has" to
>>>> live with someone like that. Incarceration without crime (or maybe
>>>> I should say, for the crime of not meeting one's parents'
>>>> expectations) is simply wrong.
>>>
>>> Okay, then at what age may one ask a child to leave one's house?
>>>
>>> Oh, I get it! :-) Good one. You may *ask* all that
>>> you want! It is a free country! It's just that you
>>> cannot *tell* a child to leave. Haw haw haw!
>>
>> ### On the contrary, since you are the owner of your house, you may
>> demand that others leave it, with or without a reason.
>>
>
>
> Anyone living for an extended time in a residence has certain rights.
> For example, if you let your friend stay in your house for free, you
> cannot just up and kick him out one day.
### Is this an actual rule of law? Is it statutory in many jurisdictions, or
common law?
Can you claim rights to other person's property if there is an explicit
agreement that you don't have any rights?
-----------------------------
Now if you have a rental
> contract, you can have the sheriff kick him out if you give notice.
> But if there is no written agreement, you may have to sue. So maybe
> the only way to get a kid to leave would be to sue--that is, if the
> kid did not want to leave. Even so, in such a lawsuit, I am not sure
> it would necessarily be a walkover. Even in that situtation, the kid
> may have a good srgument for staying.
### Aside from legal considerations within today's legal system, I would
tend to refuse to accept such arguments. Allowing non-contractual
limitations on property goes against the grain with me.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 10 2003 - 15:27:07 MDT