Started By
Message

re: Monument Litigation (For OT Lawyers)

Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:31 pm to
Posted by ajs008
Denver, CO
Member since Feb 2007
657 posts
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:31 pm to
Just stating it wasn't protected under the 1966 act like Rex stated it was. Went to the little historical gallery in Grand Central regarding Penn. That place was a marvel.
Posted by Kafka
I am the moral conscience of TD
Member since Jul 2007
142667 posts
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:35 pm to
quote:

Just stating it wasn't protected under the 1966 act like Rex stated it was
Posted by threeputt
God's Country
Member since Sep 2008
24791 posts
Posted on 12/29/15 at 11:37 pm to
But that act does not give protection by law.
Posted by Rex
Here, there, and nowhere
Member since Sep 2004
66001 posts
Posted on 12/30/15 at 11:55 am to
quote:

Just stating it wasn't protected under the 1966 act like Rex stated it was.

I was incorrect on that. Bad information from a website, and I always admit when I'm wrong.

HOWEVER....

The argument doesn't change. Over 1750 sites have been removed under the 1966 act because it was never intended to be permanent protection against all cases.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram