Current Events > Orlando Bloom and Katy Peryy are suing to take a home away from a 83 yr old vet

(+) Yeah! (+)

josiskrazy posted...

Wtf I'm right wing?

Well, you sure went out of your way to make sure they were " fake lib" celebrities like that matters for some reason. Walk and talks like a duck and all that.

Mussurana posted...

No, you merely posted his family's net posts as if that was somehow relevant.

Yes.

I was giving additional context to who he was and what kind of people he and his family are, since, again, that context was lacking. I made no comments on who should win or legality or anything. You're throwing a hissy fit over nothing.

Orlando Bloom always came off like a major douche. I don't really care about this though

HashtagSEP posted...

Yes.

I was giving additional context to who he was and what kind of people he and his family are, since, again, that context was lacking. I made no comments on who should win or legality or anything. You're throwing a hissy fit over nothing.

Really?

So you jumped into a dispute over whether someone's politics should influence the law with his family's opinions, for "context".

Sure, why not? I'm bored, so let's pretend I believe you.

CE dropping some gems today

Mussurana posted...

Really?

So you jumped into a dispute over whether someone's politics should influence the law with his family's opinions, for "context".

Sure, why not? I'm bored, so let's pretend I believe you.

No. I posted before that. Somebody even quoted said post. My posts had nothing to do with those other posts. Maybe read the topic next time if you don't want to look like an ass.

Returning_CEmen posted...

If you actually read the report they arent suing. They are only named in the lawsuit

15 damn posts including the damn TC for anyone to notice/mention this.

FFS people, be better

Zeeak4444 posted...

15 damn posts including the damn TC for anyone to notice/mention this.

FFS people, be better

Now that's fair criticism.

Sandalorn posted...

Well, you sure went out of your way to make sure they were " fake lib" celebrities like that matters for some reason. Walk and talks like a duck and all that.

Yea I'll go tell my Brazilian wife and gay daughter how much of a right winger I am

josiskrazy posted...

Yea I'll go tell my Brazilian wife and gay daughter how much of a right winger I am

Luckyyyyy...

josiskrazy posted...

Yea I'll go tell my Brazilian wife and gay daughter how much of a right winger I am

What a coincidence. I have a Brazilian wife and gay daughter too

A lot of disinformation in the topic title. In addition to Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom not being parties at all to the lawsuit, let alone suing, it's the homeowner who is the plaintiff in this case suing the real estate agent, not the homeowner being sued to kick him out of his house.

Huntington's is no joke. Neurodegenerative like Alzheimer's and MS

I imagine like MS(which I'm well acquainted with) he'd have good days and bad days, and on bad days it's like you basically have dementia and your cognition is in the toilet

invertedlegdrop posted...

Luckyyyyy...

I am! She's going thru some health complications at the moment, see sig, but yea she's pretty cool lol

Axiom posted...

What a coincidence. I have a Brazilian wife and gay daughter too

Are you being serious?

ArchNemo posted...

You're not obligated to have a lawyer or a real estate agent. It's a very good idea for obvious reasons, but nothing forces you to. If their lawyers wrote up a contract and he signed it, that's all it takes.

If what he says is true, they likely fleeced him for far less than the property is actually worth and while they could move anymore else, they likely don't want to give up whatever deal they got on the property.

And time is on Bloom and Perry's side. The dude is 83 with Huntington's. Every second he still lives is essentially borrowed time.

This sucks all around.

What an ass

Great pair of tits too

I mean, if it's worth that much, this is clearly a matter of one rich person vs another, and I don't really get why we should care either way.

Serious_Cat posted...

A lot of disinformation in the topic title. In addition to Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom not being parties at all to the lawsuit, let alone suing, it's the homeowner who is the plaintiff in this case suing the real estate agent, not the homeowner being sued to kick him out of his house.

This

Zenxin posted...

Being 83 and a vet, I can only assume he's a conservative so I kind of want the celebrities to crush him.

i dont like conservatives either but i have a hard time feeling comfortable with your statement! but then again katy and orlando themselves arent even suing him so i guess its a moot point! *hug*

josiskrazy posted...

Yea I'll go tell my Brazilian wife and gay daughter how much of a right winger I am

lmaoooo whomst amongst us does not have a brazilian wife and gay daughter

SimulationSwarm posted...

lmaoooo whomst amongst us does not have a brazilian wife and gay daughter

Dude literally pulled the "one of my friends is black" card

Tyranthraxus posted...

Dude literally pulled the "one of my friends is black" card

Alright alright, ya got me.

CARRRNE_ASADA posted...

We cant just go "ooh poor old vet", cause you looking at it from an emotional pov.

WE have documentation that he is sick, and that he just under a major operation right before this happened. Yeah I am giving the old sick man the benefit of the doubt .

cjsdowg posted...

WE have documentation that he is sick, and that he just under a major operation right before this happened. Yeah I am giving the old sick man the benefit of the doubt .

...so why don't you tell me what his position is in this situation?

Just give them their money back and move on

The headline reminds me of a Bojack Horseman episode, where Bojack had a dispute with a seal at a grocery store, and then the seal made a big fuss about it in the media. He made sure to wear his Navy uniform during interviews to make it about celebrities VS military, when him being in the military never came up in the original conflict.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


No but does saying Katy Perry is a fake lib make me a right winger? Lol

Come on dude.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Don't forget the famously left-wing Dick Cheney, who has a gay daughter.

Hey, my town in the news again for Rich elitist fuckeads

PurpleOutsider posted...

Don't forget the famously left-wing Dick Cheney, who has a gay daughter.

A good deal of anti-gay legislation did get sidelined during his tenure however.

Not defending that man by any means, but occasionally it's interesting to note how family priorities effect elected officials

"Westcott is in poor health and was diagnosed with Huntingtons disease a condition that damages nerve cells in the brain causing them to stop working properly in 2015.
Court documents obtained by the Daily Mail and New York Post"

This gives the 83 year old veteran enough clause to claim impairment, therefore not meeting the requirements of contract law to be in capacity when making mutual assent. No matter what Katy and Bloom do in court, the veteran has a very very strong case. It doesn't matter if the veteran signed the contract and agreed to sell the house. He can rescind the contract and have the court disaffirm it, if he can prove that he was mentally impaired at the time and was not in capacity. The only thing required of him is to give back the amount paid for the house, nothing more.

I'm so glad I took a business law class.

Iamdepressed posted...

"Westcott is in poor health and was diagnosed with Huntingtons disease a condition that damages nerve cells in the brain causing them to stop working properly in 2015.
Court documents obtained by the Daily Mail and New York Post"

This gives the 83 year old veteran enough clause to claim impairment, therefore not meeting the requirements of contract law to be in capacity when making mutual assent. No matter what Katy and Bloom do in court, the veteran has a very very strong case. It doesn't matter if the veteran signed the contract and agreed to sell the house. He can rescind the contract and have the court disaffirm it, if he can prove that he was mentally impaired at the time and was not in capacity. The only thing required of him is to give back the amount paid for the house, nothing more.

I'm so glad I took a business law class.

Sounds about right, Huntington's is no joke.

Oh man Huntington's disease is fucking brutal

What may potentially make his case difficult is it sounds like he spoke to the realtor one day, then spoke to the broker and signed the contract another day, and then decided to cancel the sale a week later, all while nothing regarding his actual status had changed. Thus, there's an extra hurdle of explaining why he wasn't of sound mind in the first two instances, but somehow was when he decided to cancel, and didn't just change his mind.

So he agreed to a contract and then backed out?

ClayGuida posted...

So he agreed to a contract and then backed out?

Agreed to the contract, signed the contract the next day, then wanted to cancel a week later.

StealThisSheen posted...

What may potentially make his case difficult is it sounds like he spoke to the realtor one day, then spoke to the broker and signed the contract another day, and then decided to cancel the sale a week later, all while nothing regarding his actual status had changed. Thus, there's an extra hurdle of explaining why he wasn't of sound mind in the first two instances, but somehow was when he decided to cancel, and didn't just change his mind.

Not if you know anything about Huntington's. Really impairs your mental functions without you realising it.

Mussurana posted...

Not if you know anything about Huntington's. Really impairs your mental functions without you realising it.

Right, but he didn't... Not have Huntington's a week later, which is the point. He'd have to explain why he wasn't of sound mind on the two days he dealt with the realtors, but then was of sound mind a week later when he wanted to cancel. He'd need to prove that because, as it stands, it looks like he just changed his mind. If everything was the same on all three days, then he can't really prove he didn't just change his mind.

StealThisSheen posted...

Right, but he didn't... Not have Huntington's a week later, which is the point. He'd have to explain why he wasn't of sound mind on the two days he dealt with the realtors, but then was of sound mind a week later when he wanted to cancel. He'd need to prove that because, as it stands, it looks like he just changed his mind.

You think someone with Huntington's is in any position to do that?

Of course, it's probably true that he shouldn't have been making his own legal decisions at all with that condition.

But pulling legal gotchas on the mentally ill is a terrible take chap.

Mussurana posted...

You think someone with Huntington's is in any position to do that?

Of course, it's probably true that he shouldn't have been making his own legal decisions at all with that condition.

But pulling legal gotchas on the mentally ill is a terrible take chap.

That's not a "legal gotcha" at all, it's just literally how the law works. He's the one suing and making the claim, so he needs to prove it. But, so far, it looks like he's going to have a difficult time doing that, because, as it stands, it's:

Day 1: Huntington's and painkillers
Day 2: Huntington's and painkillers
Day 10: Huntington's and painkillers

There's nothing there to easily go "Well, X was different than Y, which was why I wasn't able to make the decision."

He's the one making the claim "I wasn't able to make my own decisions on Day 1 and Day 2, but I was able to on Day 10." The court is going to ask why.

EDIT: It should be like, Day 8 or 9, my math sucks, but you get it.

StealThisSheen posted...

That's not a "legal gotcha" at all, it's just literally how the law works. He's the one suing and making the claim, so he needs to prove it. But, so far, it looks like he's going to have a difficult time doing that, because, as it stands, it's:

Day 1: Huntington's and painkillers
Day 2: Huntington's and painkillers
Day 10: Huntington's and painkillers

There's nothing there to easily go "Well, X was different than Y, which was why I wasn't able to make the decision."

He's the one making the claim "I wasn't able to make my own decisions on Day 1 and Day 2, but I was able to on Day 10." The court is going to ask why.

You've never met anyone with Huntington's I take it?

Mussurana posted...

You've never met anyone with Huntington's I take it?

I feel like you're purposely missing the point to troll, so I think we're done.

StealThisSheen posted...

Right, but he didn't... Not have Huntington's a week later, which is the point. He'd have to explain why he wasn't of sound mind on the two days he dealt with the realtors, but then was of sound mind a week later when he wanted to cancel. He'd need to prove that because, as it stands, it looks like he just changed his mind. If everything was the same on all three days, then he can't really prove he didn't just change his mind.

I'm certainly no law expert, but... I don't think that's the case? If it's determined that he wasn't of sound mind when he signed, then basically those signatures are void in the first place and his status later on is irrelevant.

Mizznox posted...

I'm certainly no law expert, but... I don't think that's the case? If it's determined that he wasn't of sound mind when he signed, then basically those signatures are void in the first place and his status later on is irrelevant.

Right, but that determination needs to be made in the first place. And since he's arguing he WAS of sound mind within a week later, despite no change in his status, then it brings into question his argument that he wasn't of sound mind to begin with.

The point is he's going to have difficulty proving the initial claim ("I wasn't of sound mind") due to the proximity of events where he apparently was.

EDIT: Basically, since he's the plaintiff, he needs to prove it was him not being in sound mind, not just seller's remorse. And certain events make that difficult.

Hmm, this thread keeps showing as updating, but from my perspective posts are disappearing.

Have I been blocked? How exciting, I do believe that might be a first!

Boo hoo Katy Perry go buy another fucking house, excuse me, mansion ffs smh

Possibly I should log out and check, but that feels like spoiling the game :D

StealThisSheen posted...

That's not a "legal gotcha" at all, it's just literally how the law works. He's the one suing and making the claim, so he needs to prove it. But, so far, it looks like he's going to have a difficult time doing that, because, as it stands, it's:

Day 1: Huntington's and painkillers
Day 2: Huntington's and painkillers
Day 10: Huntington's and painkillers

There's nothing there to easily go "Well, X was different than Y, which was why I wasn't able to make the decision."

He's the one making the claim "I wasn't able to make my own decisions on Day 1 and Day 2, but I was able to on Day 10." The court is going to ask why.

EDIT: It should be like, Day 8 or 9, my math sucks, but you get it.

It really be like that with some of these diseases though

I was a full time carer for a man with late stage MS, some days he would be completely lucid with good cognition, other days if he had over exerted or hadn't eaten right or if the weather was too humid he'd be unable to talk, move or even think clearly. Then after a good day's sleep he could be fine again by the end of the week

Huntingtons is a similar disease so I'd wager they have good and bad days all the time too with sudden changes

Another post I can't see, this is a new experience.

Don't really want to check, feels like the suspense is likely more exciting than the reality :D