My family is currently in an easement lawsuit. A new landowner is trying to claim we have no easement. The case has been going on for over 3 years now and he claims openly that he is going to run us out of money. We have almost got the case to court, and once it is, we will most likely win our case and get our proper easement. The problem is that he is out to hurt us in any way possible.
The new issue is our cabin. It's not really a cabin, on paper it is recorded as a pic-nic shelter and was approved by the county planning department in 1996. Our opponent's lawyer went to the planning department and claimed we had an illegal structure on our property. The new head of the planning department is taking him for his word and has informed us that we may have to tear it down. She claims that the lawyer says we should have had a building permit and we didn't. The old head of the planning department is now the county commisioner and after talking to her, she says we did everything right and up to their standards at that time. At that time they also "grandfathered in" our structure. What can we do to prove this and have this issue behind us? It seems to me that new laws shouldn't apply to old instances that were already okayed by the same department.
Any help would be greatly appreciated as this case has become way to personal. Please help.
The new issue is our cabin. It's not really a cabin, on paper it is recorded as a pic-nic shelter and was approved by the county planning department in 1996. Our opponent's lawyer went to the planning department and claimed we had an illegal structure on our property. The new head of the planning department is taking him for his word and has informed us that we may have to tear it down. She claims that the lawyer says we should have had a building permit and we didn't. The old head of the planning department is now the county commisioner and after talking to her, she says we did everything right and up to their standards at that time. At that time they also "grandfathered in" our structure. What can we do to prove this and have this issue behind us? It seems to me that new laws shouldn't apply to old instances that were already okayed by the same department.
Any help would be greatly appreciated as this case has become way to personal. Please help.