3 ms·
It's a puff of logic in either circumstance: If he's wrong, he never had exclusive rights to public land in the first place and it was not his to lose. If he'
by CottonMcKnight 3y ago
It's a puff of logic in either circumstance:
If he's wrong, he never had exclusive rights to public land in the first place and it was not his to lose.
If he's right, he obviously did not suffer the loss of the value of that property.
- xref 3y agoI believe corner crossing _was_ illegal until this court case
- gpderetta 3y agoStill, if he had won the case, it would have stayed illegal and he would have had no financial loss. If he had lost the case, he would have suffered a financial loss, but having lost cannot recover it from the "trespassers".