Skip to comments.
Unmarried Couple Denied Right to Move In
WWTI (ABC) ^
| 2/23/2006
| United Press International
Posted on 02/23/2006 1:53:52 PM PST by Quick1
A Missouri couple say they were denied an occupancy permit for their new home because they're not married.
Olivia Shelltrack and Fondray Loving have been together for 13 years and have three children, ages 8, 10 and 15, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.
The couple are appealing the occupancy permit denial from the Black Jack, Mo., board of adjustment, which requires people living together to have blood, marriage or adoption ties. Loving is not the father of Shelltrack's oldest child.
I was basically told, you can have one child living in your house if you're not married, but more than that, you can't, Shelltrack told the newspaper.
This is about the definition of family, not if they're married or not, Mayor Normal McCourt said. It's what cities do to maintain the housing and to hold down overcrowding.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: cohabitation; cohabitationlaws; cultureofbusybodies; fornicationlaws; homeowners; marriagelaws; occupancypermit; propertyrights; puritans; unmarriedcouple
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-274 next last
Unreal. How is having four people in a house overcrowding? I can understand not wanting 20 college kids in a house, but more than 3? This is ridiculous.
I could also certainly use an education on what exactly an occupancy permit is, as I have no idea.
1
posted on
02/23/2006 1:53:53 PM PST
by
Quick1
To: Quick1
Isn't thirteen years long enough for a common law marriage?
2
posted on
02/23/2006 1:55:20 PM PST
by
Eepsy
To: Quick1
If the family were illegals, the permit would have been approved plus the family would have received a signed framed picture of GWB to hang on their wall.
To: Quick1
I could also certainly use an education on what exactly an occupancy permit is, as I have no idea.I was wondering about that, too. I don't recall ever being asked for one!
4
posted on
02/23/2006 1:56:31 PM PST
by
Tax-chick
(My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
To: Quick1
Fondray Loving vs. Normal McCourt. You can't make this stuff up.
5
posted on
02/23/2006 1:56:38 PM PST
by
My2Cents
("The essence of American journalism is vulgarity divested of truth." -- Winston Churchill)
To: Quick1; Eepsy
The "Black Jack, Mo., board of adjustment" is going to get a very quick adjustment from the courts. This matter was decided a long time ago by the Supreme Court.
To: Eepsy
In Arkansas, they're probably considered cousins.
7
posted on
02/23/2006 1:57:18 PM PST
by
My2Cents
("The essence of American journalism is vulgarity divested of truth." -- Winston Churchill)
To: Xenalyte
Fondray Loving vs. Normal McCourt. You can't make this stuff up.(I think they're both men ...)
8
posted on
02/23/2006 1:57:30 PM PST
by
Tax-chick
(My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
To: Tax-chick
Good Lord above.
If they've been together for 13 years, how do they have a 15-year-old?
9
posted on
02/23/2006 1:58:51 PM PST
by
Xenalyte
(Can you count, suckas? I say the future is ours . . . if you can count.)
To: Tax-chick
I guess I coulda read the rest of the article . . .
10
posted on
02/23/2006 1:59:12 PM PST
by
Xenalyte
(Can you count, suckas? I say the future is ours . . . if you can count.)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
"would have received a signed framed picture of GWB to hang on their wall."
So that's how you get one of those.
11
posted on
02/23/2006 1:59:47 PM PST
by
kenth
To: Xenalyte
LOL - happens to me, too.
12
posted on
02/23/2006 2:00:06 PM PST
by
Tax-chick
(My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
To: Xenalyte
from the article...
>> Loving is not the father of Shelltrack's oldest child.
To: My2Cents
"Fondray Loving vs. Normal McCourt. You can't make this stuff up."
Unfortunately we don't have to.
Mix in Shelltrack and Black Jack, MO and it sounds like bad comedy writing.
14
posted on
02/23/2006 2:00:24 PM PST
by
BadAndy
(The DemocRATs are the enemy's most effective weapon.)
To: Quick1
It's a condition precedent to closing on a home. Unless the local municipality deems a house fit for occupation and the prospective occupants qualified, then the deal doesn't go through.
It can be revoked (zoned for private occupancy, city finds out it's being used as an impromptu boarding house or group home, etc.)
I had to wait almost two months to move into my new home because the city would not give an OP until there was a regulation paved kerb in front.
To: Xenalyte
I guess I coulda read the rest of the article . . .
I guess I coulda read the rest of the THREAD... :)
To: Xenalyte
And why aren't they married?
To: wideawake
My guess would be that one or both of them is legally married to somebody else.
18
posted on
02/23/2006 2:03:46 PM PST
by
Tax-chick
(My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
To: Tax-chick
To: wideawake
And why aren't they married? Probably they need time to think it over and decide if it's right for them.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-274 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson