The BS is strong with this one.
Posted on 09/26/2009 4:11:25 AM PDT by don-o
Dan Fuchs said business was just starting to pick up at his kiosk in the Mall at Johnson City.
Fuchs’ business, the Graphic Edge, printed slogans and pictures on items such as coffee cups, bumper stickers and T-shirts. He said more than half of his business came from the sale of anti-Obama merchandise. Bumper stickers with slogans such as “SOS: Stop Obama’s Socialism,” “Nobama,” and “Chicago got the party, but the country got the hangover” were displayed around the small stand.
Now it appears Fuchs is out of business at the mall, but mall officials say this decision was not based upon political views.
Friday afternoon, Fuchs was handed a lease termination notice by mall officials and signed by Mall General Manager Tembra Aldridge. The letter states that the option to terminate the lease agreement is effective 11:59 p.m. today and that he must vacate the mall premises and remove his property before then.
(Excerpt) Read more at johnsoncitypress.com ...
The BS is strong with this one.
Best solution is to exercise your own property rights and not trade your property on his.
Sure. But, the man had an agreement with them. What is not known is are they within their rights to terminate that agreement?
I would hope he at least got a TRO.
I hope this guy makes a fortune! It's amazing how the mall management can so brazenly lie about why they terminated his lease and expect people to believe it.
All we know is from the article, and that sounds like he complied with their request to remove the “offending” items from his display.
Yeah, just go to the airport malls at BWI and Dulles and you see “Obama is great!” merchandise on sell everywhere.
Exactly right-—case in point-—SPENCER’s!
Not really. Freedom of Speech, means the GOVERNMENT, can not infringe upon your right to express your self. You do not have the right to be on someone else's property, if they do not want you there.
agreed there. Property rights must be protected. Hence the suggestions I listed about alternative methods to promote.
The suggestion of a lawsuit is using the lefts tactics against them. They sued us to get God out of school, remove references for everything that “offended” them from everywhere, and we are now being innundated with muslim lawsuits for face/head coverings in DMV photos, footbaths in airports, and putting a crucifix in a jar of urine and calling it art.
The teaparties were a start. We are beginning to see we have to fight fire with fire. We used the lefts playbook against them there, and we must use it in situations like this. We, as a group, so strongly believe in the right to free speech, that even when we are offended or silenced, we just walk away, shrugging our shoulders. That is how the left has gained a foothold, and we cannot let them gain anymore.
While the lawsuit will most likely not be successful, it will raise awareness in the area as to the reason this man is prevented from bringing his wares into the mall. That, with the mood this country is in, may be enough to actually make a dent in the malls traffic. People also have the right not to shop there if they are outraged, but how can they be outraged if they don’t know what is going on? The lawsuit is the soapbox.
Deja vous all over again?
He has a lease agreement that is effective through 31 December. Obviously, these contracts mean about as much as the contracts that GM and Chrysler had with their stockholders.
I guess we need to see the lease to know how it can be broken. Lets assume the mall has competent lawyers, and the owner has conferred with them.
This man has a lease agreement, and all of the bundle of rights that transfer from the landlord to the tennant. As long the tennant is not engaged in illegal enterprise, and performing the authorized activities specified in the lease agreement, there really is not much the landlord can do. I am sure, subjective approval of the message on merchandise being sold will not rise to a level sufficient enough to terminate the lease. Take the landlord to court. Judges don't take kindly, to over zealous landlords.
The left has done it for years, with great success, considering our current situation, and the number of frivolous lawsuits (hot coffee spills on laps, sue everyone etc). We have to realize we will be uncomfortable either way. The reason we are uncomfortable with it is because we DO recognize and respect and follow the constitution, the left uses that loyalty against us. We can either fight within the law or wait til its too late. Which way should we go......
That may or may not be the case. The owner does not have a right to violate his contractual obligation. (I realize that there are "no cause" options sometimes. We have no information from the article. But, Mr. Fuchs should have a lawyer take a look at the thing)
This has happened to another guy. Saw him on Glenn Beck about 2 months ago. A mall employee complained about his merchandise and they withdrew his lease. I’m sure they said it was racism.
I would bet there is a clause in the contract that allows the mall to terminate the lease for “just cause.” The way to be successful in this lawsuit is to file and then during discovery ask for documentation of customer complaints. Also ask for documentation of complaints filed against other merchants regarding objectionable merchandise and a list of other tenants who have had there leases terminated because of customer complaints.
The way to fight this is to show the mall’s actions were capricious and arbitrary and there is no consistency in it’s enforcement. Chances are there is no documentation regarding complaints about his merchandise and there have been no other tenants whose lease has been terminated for “just cause.” This is how we have to fight back. Make the argument that the only reason the lease was terminated was because of a political agenda. It’s time folks we start using the left’s tactics against them.
That’s a sleazy mall...always avoided it. Then again; most of them are sleazy.
I didn’t know that about Lakeside, but then I don’t shop there too much.
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.