|
| So by your own statement the government allowed them a irrigation ditch, which they improved without ok to a big gun system, then again changed to a pivot system again with out permission, and built part of that system onto the government land.
If the Maude's owned the land in dispute why did they try to buy said land in 1950?
and again are you willing ot give them 40 acres of your land?
do you have any clue what is considered permanent components and what is considered non-permanent components ? and why they phrase it that way?
and NO I don't think it was handled in the best way, but Im not sure how entitled this generation of the Maude family feels they are! the family appears at least 3 times to believe they were entitled to change the lease without getting permission from the land owner. | |
|
Maudes
