Blurbs from the Bossman

New PA Lien Law Causes Confusion Among Realtors, Lenders

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Thu, 27 Feb 2014 18:29:06 EST

Recent changes to Pennsylvania's Lien Law have caused quite the confusion amongst the real estate, title and lending communities with regard to the indexing and reporting of delinquent property tax liens. This article aims to help dispel some basic misunderstandings about the new law.

I've recently had several clients ask me about newly enacted changes to Pennsylvania law regarding how liens for delinquent property taxes are indexed. Their questions reflect a series of misunderstandings about the legislation and the scope of its impact.

Act 93 of 2013, signed into law on November 27, 2013, amends Pennsylvania's Municipal Claim and Tax Lien Law. Since then, there has been much confusion among the real estate and lending communities regarding the ramifications of this new law and how it will affect real estate transactions. There has been great concern that the amendment changes the way examiners and abstractors search delinquent property taxes. One client with whom I spoke was concerned that her vendor examiners would need to start searching the tax lien records to determine if there is a lien on any and all other real estate owned by a record owner in a given county because she has been told that “a lien on one property becomes a lien on all.”

Essentially, all Act 93 does is to streamline the process which a local taxing authority must follow in order to reduce a delinquent property tax lien (which stays with the property) to a personal judgment (which follows the delinquent property owner). The law regarding enforcement of personal judgments remains unchanged.

This means that such a lien would need to be indexed against the owner personally before it could be considered a lien which would attach to "all" real estate owned by that person. In other words, the only way it would attach to "all" of the owner's real estate holdings is if it was indexed in the Prothonotary's Office, which examiners should already be checking when doing a judgment search.

This method of indexing liens against real estate has been custom and practice in the Commonwealth for as long as I can remember, and as far as I can tell, would not be changed or affected by the new legislation.

DISCLAIMER: This writer is not a licensed attorney. This article is intended for general information purposes only, and should not be construed as a legal opinion or relied upon as legal advice.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Reaffirms Dunham Rule

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Mon, 06 May 2013 02:52:18 EST

In a much anticipated ruling, The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has upheld a long-standing principle of real property law in the Commonwealth, putting to rest an issue of great concern to landowners and energy companies all across the Keystone State.

The so-called “Dunham Rule”, which has been well-settled law in this Commonwealth for more than 130 years, was recently reaffirmed by the high court in Butler v. Powers Estate, ___ A.3d ___, 2013 WestLaw 1749828, No. 27 MAP 2012 (Pa., April 24, 2013). (See my previous blog entry, When Is A Gas Not A Gas?) The state Superior Court in September of 2011 had reversed and remanded, paving the way for a potentially huge economic impact on the ownership rights of thousands of property owners and Marcellus gas leaseholders across the state.

In a recently published opinion, the Court ruled that the Superior Court erred in relying on a 1983 ruling as its rationale for reversal. In US Steel Corp. v. Hoge, 468 A.2d 1380 (1983), the state Supreme Court held that ownership of coalbed gas is conferred upon the owner of the coal. The high court did not deem the Hoge decision relevant, since that case did not discuss the applicability of Dunham.

In its unanimous decision, the Supreme Court reversed, stating that:

“We reaffirm that the rule continues to be the law of Pennsylvania,” the Court said in its 24-page opinion. “In our view, neither the Superior Court nor Appellees have provided any justification for overruling or limiting the Dunham Rule and its longstanding progeny that have formed the bedrock for innumerable private, real property transactions for nearly two centuries.”

This means that a unique aspect of Pennsylvania property law will continue in place for at least the foreseeable future. Since the law of most other states holds that a conveyance or reservation of "minerals" does indeed include oil & gas, Pennsylvania will remain an outlier in that regard. The full text of the opinion can be read here.

Anti-Proposition 8 Arguments Based on Feelings, Not Facts

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:47:43 EST

I recently read an article by Meg Whitman, CEO of Hewlett-Packard, in which she outlines her reasons for joining “a prominent group of conservatives, moderate Republicans and social libertarians” in signing onto an amicus brief in Hollingsworth v. Perry, a Supreme Court case challenging California’s Proposition 8. In citing her reasons for opposing Prop. 8, Ms. Whitman states in her article that, “I feel the time has come to bestow marriage equality to same-sex couples,” arguing that there is “no legitimate, fact-based reason for providing different legal treatment of committed relationships between same-sex couples.” I respectfully disagree.

In the interest of full disclosure, this writer is a Bible-believing disciple of Jesus Christ; therefore, my thoughts and opinions on this subject are firmly rooted in the tenets of His teachings. Furthermore, I am a true libertarian where this issue is concerned. However, I am against being compelled by militant homosexual activists to “tolerate” and agree with their lifestyle. Trust me when I say that I REALLY do not care what anyone does in the privacy of his/her bedroom. When someone insists, however, that it’s none of my business while flouting their sexual proclivities in my face, telling me that I MUST accept their lifestyle as "normal" or "natural", that’s where they lose me.

I also feel it necessary to point out here that nowhere in the Bible does it state that God "hates" or singles out homosexuals. His Word, as expressed in the Holy Bible, states that ALL sex outside of marriage, (hetero AND homo), is a sin. “Give honor to marriage, and remain faithful to one another in marriage. God will surely judge people who are immoral and those who commit adultery,” Hebrews 13:4 (NLT). It also espouses the principle that God hates the sin, “For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God's glorious standard,” Romans 3:23 (NLT), but loves the sinner, “But God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners,” Romans 5:8 (NLT). Thus, “gay bashing” is DEFINITELY not in accordance with Christian teaching, either, despite the stories you see in the news about that handful of knuckleheads from the Westboro Baptist Church, who go around spewing that “God hates fags” nonsense. To be clear, bigotry and hatred are not my motivations here.

Marriage is a civil and social contract, to be sure, but it’s much more than just a “corporate merger” between two persons. Traditional marriage is not simply a creature of statute. Rather, it is based on the Scriptural principle of a holy union between man and woman, ordained by God, geared not only toward procreation, but the unity and well-being of both the husband and wife. We see this principle manifest throughout history. It has been codified into our system of laws. In the eyes of the law, a married couple is considered one person, which is an extension of the Biblical principle of “two becoming one flesh.” Our body of laws regarding tenancy by the entireties, spousal immunity, (which prevents the state from compelling one spouse to testify against the other), and community property are but a few examples of this.

Marriage also imposes certain duties and obligations upon both a husband and his wife. Throughout Scripture, a wife is regarded as highly valuable, thus worthy of great care and respect, “The man who finds a wife finds a treasure, and he receives favor from the LORD,” Proverbs 18:22 (NLT); Who can find a virtuous and capable wife? She is more precious than rubies,” Proverbs 31:10 (NLT). This is why God even sets forth a commandment to men in this regard: “For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up His life for her,” Ephesians 5:25 (NLT). In addition, the Bible clearly sets forth the duties of husbands and wives toward one another in Ephesians Chapter 5. This is not to say that all marriages are perfect unions, by any means. As fallible human beings, we are prone to defect and failure, but this does not alter the principle of the ideal.

My main argument against so-called ‘homosexual marriage’ is based not only on the Bible, but also on science and biology. The physiological and psychological (as well as spiritual) differences between males and females are self-evident and are well-documented. Same-sex unions, by their very nature, are sterile unions whose primary purpose is to gratify of the desires of two persons, rather than to benefit society as a whole. They deny the innate differences between the sexes, not to mention the primary purpose of marriage: propagation of the human race. “This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined with his wife; and the two are united into one,” Genesis 2:24 (NLT). The King James version calls this “two becoming one flesh.” In addition to the Scriptural argument, the biology is all wrong, therein is my problem with so-called "gay marriage". Biologically speaking, it is impossible for two persons of the same sex to “become one flesh”. The institution of marriage was founded out of biological necessity and if the word “marriage” is redefined to mean anything, it will eventually mean nothing. Allow me to explain.

Even traditional marriage between two opposite-sex persons imposes certain legal limitations upon its participants. Persons of the opposite sex, for example, cannot legally marry if they are related to one another, (i.e., brother and sister, father and daughter, etc.), not to mention laws against polygamy. Now, let's just say that in a state which recognizes homosexual unions, for example, Connecticut, that two brothers wish to be "married". What's to stop them from challenging laws prohibiting blood relatives from marrying? Already, the ACLU is using precedents set by the decisions regarding same-sex unions to argue for the legalization of polygamy. Simply put, every time society crosses one line, the activists move the goal post. If the state must grant equal status to same-sex couples based simply upon the fact that they love one another, on what logical basis can it prohibit such things as incest, bestiality or pedophilia?

I also reject the argument that traditional marriage somehow "deprives" homosexuals of their civil rights. There are already a number of ways that same-sex couples can secure and preserve their legal rights as couples; many companies now even offer the same benefit packages to employees with same-sex domestic partners as they do for traditional spouses. I am by no means against homosexual persons living their lives in any way they choose. I do believe, however, that state sanctioning of same-sex unions will have far-reaching implications for society that few people have really bothered to completely think through.

My Mother, The Meanie

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Sun, 13 May 2012 19:52:57 EST

Did you have a mean mother? Well, if you were to ask me or any of my siblings, we had the meanest mother who ever lived. If you don't believe me, just read on...

Was your Mom mean? I know ours was. Other kids got to eat junk food for breakfast; we had to eat “balanced meals”. Other kids got soda and junk food for lunch, but we got a sandwich and an apple. And for supper? We got stuff like fried chicken, green beans, mashed potatoes with gravy and homemade biscuits. And to top it all off…she’d make us wash it all down a big old glass of milk! Can you imagine such a thing?

That woman was always up in our business. You'd have thought we were prisoners in a gulag! She had to know who our friends were, where we were going and what we’d be doing. She even insisted on knowing what time we’d be home! Talk about cruel and unusual punishment!

She also made us do hard labor. We had to set the table for supper, wash the dishes, clean our own rooms, feed the dogs, take out the trash and all manner of other dirty jobs. You know, sometimes, I think she took some sort of neurotic pleasure in making our lives miserable.

She even had the unmitigated audacity to insist that we tell the truth...the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. We swore that the woman was a mind reader with eyes in the back of her head. I mean, she really knew how to make life miserable for us! And on Sundays, when other kids got to sleep in and watch cartoons on TV, Mom got us out of bed and made us go to Sunday School. She was always telling us those boring stories out of the Bible and even made us read it and learn memory verses from it!

Because of our mother, we missed out on lots of things other kids experienced. None of us ever got caught shoplifting, doing drugs or ever wound up in jail…and it was all her fault. I can tell you, we had some real battles with this woman. And you know something? I'm glad she won. We ended up being the winners…and not in the "Charlie Sheen" sense of the word. We grew up to be educated, honest, God-fearing adults…and it was all her fault.

So to my mom and to all you other moms reading this…thanks for always loving your babies by being a "mean" to them. Happy Mother's Day!

The Sincerest Form Of Flattery?

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:34:17 EST

I was originally going to post this to General Discussion, but it somehow seemed more appropriate here. It has come to my attention that a fellow SOT member is truly impressed with the way I write. So much so, that this member has seen fit to plagiarize the content of my advertising from SOT onto another website.

To be clear, we’re not simply talking about a phrase or two here and there, (after all, as God’s Word tells us, "there is no new thing under the sun", Ecclesiastes 1:9). This is blatant “copy-and-paste” plagiarism. This member simply copied and pasted my ad word-for-word, removing my company name and inserting theirs in its place. I won’t mention the name of the website (or the member) just yet, this being the Christmas season, the season of giving. Furthermore, since I’m in such a charitable mood, I’ve also decided to forebear from taking any legal action, (at least for now) to give the guilty party the opportunity to remove the offending verbiage from their advertising.

To the member of whom I speak (and you know who you are), consider this your written public notice: as the author and owner of the content at issue, I herewith demand that you IMMEDIATELY remove from all of your advertising the copyrighted material that you have brazenly and audaciously appropriated from my company. I will wait for a reasonable amount of time, but as it stands, I have plenty of evidence to back up my claims and all legal options are on the table. I await your response.

Cordially,
Scott L. Perry, President
Jireh Business Information Solutions, Inc.

When Is A Gas Not A Gas?

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 01:43:19 EST

The Pennsylvania Superior Court, one of the Keystone State’s intermediate level appellate courts, recently remanded back to the Susquehanna County Common Pleas Court a case which could have a potentially huge impact on the rights of Pennsylvania landowners. This is a case which needs to be closely watched by every land title professional practicing in Pennsylvania.

Since 1882, Pennsylvania common law has held that a reservation of “minerals” in a conveyance does not include reservation of any oil or natural gas absent a clear expression of the Grantor to do so. It’s called “the Dunham Rule” after the plaintiff in Dunham v. Kirkpatrick, 101 Pa. 36 (1882), in which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a “mineral” reservation in a deed does not include “oil and gas” absent specific language to that effect within the four corners of the document. Dunham has been controlling law in Pennsylvania for almost 130 years and was upheld as recently as 1960. Highland v. Commonwealth, 161 A.2d 390 (Pa. 1960); New York State Natural Gas Co. v. Swan-Finch Gas Development Co., et al., 278 F.2d 577 (1960).

On July 20, 2009, plaintiffs William and Mary Butler filed a Complaint to Quiet Title in Susquehanna County Common Pleas Court against the Estate and Heirs of Charles Powers, asserting fee simple ownership of their 244 acre tract in Apolacon Township, Susquehanna County, along with “all of the minerals and petroleum oils” lying thereunder, based on a claim of adverse possession. The deed upon which the Butlers base their claim was recorded in 1881 and contains the following reservation:

“[O]ne half the minerals and Petroleum Oils to said Charles Powers his heirs and assigns forever together with all and singular the buildings, water courses ways waters watercourses rights liberties privileges hereditaments and appurtenances whatsoever there unto belonging or in any wise appertaining and the reversions and remainders rents issues and profits thereof; And also all the estate right, title interest property claimed and demand whatsoever there unto belonging or in any wise appertaining in law equity or otherwise however of in to or out of the same…”

The Powers Heirs filed a counterclaim for a declaratory judgment, arguing that the mineral reservation in the 1881 deed includes Marcellus Shale gas. The basis for their assertion is that Marcellus is an “unconventional” gas of a type not contemplated at the time of the Dunham ruling, arguing that the word “minerals” includes the Marcellus Shale and therefore, the gas contained therein. They rely on the more recent ruling in US Steel Corp. v. Hoge, 468 A.2d 1380 (1983). In Hoge, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that methane gas contained in coal deposits is owned by the party which owns the coal, but gas that migrates into surrounding formations belongs to the owner of the oil & gas rights. The Butlers filed a motion for demurrer (dismissal), which was granted by the trial court. The case was appealed to the Pennsylvania Superior Court, which reversed and remanded on procedural grounds.

The Superior Court’s remand of this case is intended to give the parties “the opportunity to obtain appropriate experts on whether Marcellus shale constitutes a type of mineral such that the gas in it falls within the deed's reservation.” This introduces a new challenge to what has previously been an established and well-settled area of Pennsylvania real property law. Already, law firms throughout the region whose clients own oil & gas interests in Pennsylvania are advising them to review the reservation language contained in deeds in the chains of title to their real estate holdings.

Although the appellate court made no ruling on the applicability of Hoge to the instant case, the reversal certainly suggests room for interpretation as to exactly what constitutes a reservation of natural gas in the absence of specific language in a conveyance. Since Dunham, it has been commonly accepted and understood by parties to deeds and leases that under Pennsylvania law, oil and natural gas must be specifically excepted and reserved in conveyances of real property, so it seems unlikely that this ruling will be much of a game-changer. Nevertheless, this is a case that warrants close monitoring for further developments.

Heroes of the First Battle

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:33:30 EST

The following was written by Mr. Jim Quinn, host of America's Morning Show, in the days just after the horrific terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and dedicated to the memory of the brave men and women whose courage and determination saved the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of their fellow citizens.

As we sift through football fields of rubble with cement dust clogging our eyes and throats it may hardly seem that there is victory anywhere in this landscape of catastrophe, but there is. The first battle of the war has been fought and it was a decisive victory for America. It didn't happen on the ground, it just ended up there. It happened sometime between 10:00 am and 10:37 am in the sky over Somerset PA on United Flight 93. This was not just a symbolic victory; it was a win for the practical utility of freedom versus the robotic behavior of programmed fanaticism. In other words, it was a test of who we are versus who they are, and we won!

While there is some evidence that our military may have been forced to make a terrible choice last Tuesday it's clear that with or without an "assist" from one of our flyers, whom we shall hold blameless. The other members of our military on board the plane had already made their decision. The contents of cell phone calls from the plane bear witness to this. "But military?” what in the world are you talking about Quinn? Allow me to explain.

These people weren't in the military when they boarded the plane. They enlisted in flight. They did it without a recruiter. There was no paper work and no promise of a college education or a career skill to secure their future. They signed up knowing their future would be less than 15 minutes. The significance of the outcome of this battle will be lost on these over funded, over educated, oil saturated former Nomads. It should make them drop to their knees and make them pray to Allah for forgiveness, but it won't.

Here's why: The Battle of Fight 93 was a short but decisive encounter where the fanatic met the free. Where a group of people who have been programmed from birth to believe in the sanctity of self destruction and mass murder in the name of a god who does not exist as they envision him, came face to face with something they never understood; free people who are used to thinking for themselves. It took decades of preparation, training and pseudo religious indoctrination to prepare these men to sacrifice their lives for their twisted purpose. It took a bunch of free Americans about two minutes to prepare to sacrifice theirs. These men and women who began their day with a toothbrush and a plane ticket and nothing more on their plate than the expectation of a business meeting and dinner at Fisherman's Wharf; these people with husbands, wives and children to consider, unhesitatingly chose to give their lives for their fellow Americans in less time than it takes to boil an egg.

Advantage: Freedom! As I write this, God is probably hearing from a vast number of people He hasn't heard from in a while. In times of difficulty we are moved to turn back to that which we have neglected. Freedom will be the tool of victory in all battles as it was in this one. It is of desperate importance that we understand from whence the tool of victory emanates. You'll find it in the writings of the Framers of our Constitution. Faith and Freedom will triumph over fanaticism. In those few dreadful seconds over Somerset, the template for the coming battles emerged from the fires in which they were forged.

Free Americans fought the first battle "on the fly" and "by the seats of their pants". They did it with the only tool they had--the resourcefulness of people who can still think for themselves. They earned victory and the admiration of the Free World. The fanatics earned a smoking hole in the ground.

from "The First Battle", by James Quinn
September 17, 2001

Heroes, heroes, husky men of war,
Sons of all the heroes, of the wars before.
We're all heroes up to our ear o's,
You ask the questions,
We make suggestions,
That's what we're heroes for.

Never flinch, boys, never be afraid,
Heroes are not born, boys, heroes all are made.
Ask not why, boys, never say die, boys,
Answer the call, remember we'll all be heroes forever more.

Heroes' March by Jerry Fielding

Good to Go: Acer's Aspire Timeline X 5820T-6401 Is a Road-Ready Performer

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 22:42:56 EST

A sturdy, compact, full-featured notebook computer with plenty of computing power and better-than-average battery life.

After putting it off for far too long, I finally decided it was time for a new laptop. This is the third time I’ve replaced my mobile computer in the eleven years since I started in business for myself. The old one actually performed quite well, way better than the one it replaced (a bulky, old, underpowered Compaq that cost me half a day’s work when it crashed on me in the middle of running a 60-Year Title), but was getting a little shopworn from being hauled around with me from courthouse to courthouse. I shopped around for a while, but didn’t see anything in the stores that caught my attention. So I decided to look for something online.

Now, let me preface this by saying that no one has agreed to pay me or to compensate me for this review in any way. I simply thought that it might be helpful to the many users of this ‘site who might be in the market for good, low-priced mobile computing solution. After shopping around, doing my "due diligence" and reading all of the positive reviews, I was still just a bit skeptical about this machine. A laptop with a battery life of nearly eight hours is too good to be true--right? That’s what I thought until I finally pulled the trigger on the purchase of an Acer Timeline X 5820T-6401.

Tipping the scales at a scant 5.4 lbs., this little gem features a lightning-fast Intel Core i-5 480M 2.66 GHz processor with a 4GB RAM and 640 GB hard disk drive. I'm not into any intense graphics or gaming programs, but running multiple applications simultaneously doesn’t seem to slow it down. It’s not only lightweight, it’s also compact, only 14.9”x 9.8” x 1.3” thin, with a 15.6” screen size. Its sleek black brushed aluminum case is sturdy enough for daily use and abuse, an important feature for us “road warriors”. The full-size keyboard layout is simple and functional, and I especially like the dedicated numeric keypad.

The Timeline X also features a multi-gesture touchpad, which enables a user to scroll, zoom and flip through web pages, much like an ipad. The Windows 7 operating system that comes preloaded has a “new-and-improved” user interface with a redesigned task bar. Not much different than Vista, if you ask me. The reviews and the company literature promise a battery life of up to eight full hours, but in real-world use, the battery lasts about 5-6 hours on a single charge. This comes in handy for those of us who work in record rooms where plugging into the county’s electrical outlets is not permitted.

Other notable features include a built-in 1.3 megapixel HD webcam, HDMI hi-def a/v output and an 8x SuperMulti DVD±R/RW drive, for those of you who are into that sort of thing. MSRP is around $700, but I was able to find one through amazon.com for a little under $650, including shipping.

Overall, the Acer Timeline X 5820T-6401 is a great all-purpose machine for those who are looking for a lightweight, reasonably priced, road-ready performer.

PA Natural Gas Expo To Be Held July 21, 2011

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 22:11:25 EST

Marcellus Shale gas is the hot energy commodity everyone’s talking about here in southwestern Pennsylvania these days, and a local media concern is hosting a one-day meet-and-greet to educate the public about this vast resource and what it means to the economic viability of our region.

The Second Annual Pennsylvania Gas Expo will be held on July 21, 2011, at the Kovalchick Convention and Athletic Complex on the campus of the Indiana University of Pennsylvania. The one-day event, hosted by MDS Energy, Ltd. of Kittanning, PA and Pittsburgh-based Renda Broadcasting Corp., runs from 9AM until 4PM and will feature over 150 informational exhibits and workshops, as well as networking opportunities for suppliers and vendors involved in energy exploration and production. A panel of representatives from some of the major players like EQT Production and Energy Corporation of America will be on hand to discuss landowner's rights and address environmental impact concerns. The event is open to the public and admission is free. Click here for more information if you are interested in attending.

Federal Judge Declares "ObamaCare" Unconstitutional

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Tue, 01 Feb 2011 14:13:35 EST

A federal judge yesterday ruled in favor of 26 state governors and attorneys general (mostly Republicans) who have filed suit against the Obama administration, saying that the recently passed Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional. But administration officials say they will move forward despite the decision.

The decision, handed down by Senior U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson, cites the mandate that all persons carry health coverage as the chief reason for the ruling, according to an article on abcnews.go.com.

In a footnote to the 78-page ruling, Judge Vinson included a statement from then-candidate Obama:

“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that, ‘If a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’”

The Court's rationale was based mostly upon Jeffersonian notions of limitations upon federal power. Not surprisingly, administration officials called Judge Vinson's analysis "thoroughly odd and unconventional", saying that the judge's "surpassingly curious reading" calls the entire decision into question. White House officials have publicly vowed to continue to implement the new law despite the ruling. If they do, according to constitutional lawyer Mark Levin, the administration may find itself in contempt of court.

“It does not matter that two other Federal judges ruled that Obamacare is constitutional. A Federal judge has issued a sweeping ruling that the individual mandate destroys the complicated nature of this statute. So he ruled the entire statue unconstitutional . That’s the ruling the Obama Administration must confront, that’s the ruling it must deal with. It has one alternative and one alternative only, to appeal it. It cannot defy a federal judge’s ruling and once again I want to encourage the litigants in this case, if they continue to implement this, that they go right back in front of this judge with a draft for a contempt order"

This is but another example of how this administration picks and chooses which laws it wants to obey. One thing is for sure, this is far from over...

Energy Boom Fuels Region's Re-emergence As Industrial Powerhouse

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:02:10 EST

Energy innovation and technology continues to create thousands of much-needed jobs all across the Commonwealth and in southwestern Pennsylvania in particular. But could opposition from environmental groups and the prospect of politicians seeking new sources of tax revenue slow or perhaps even stall that economic progress?

Southwestern Pennsylvania has a long, proud history as an energy-producing region. Readily available (and seemingly endless) supplies of energy from coal, oil and natural gas were among the chief reasons that men such as Henry Clay Frick, George Westinghouse and their contemporaries selected this region as the place in which to bring their innovations and ideas to fruition and to seek their great fortunes in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries.

Today, we still have the immense deposits of coal, along with the largest known reserve of natural gas shale and dozens of local firms involved in the development of alternative energy sources like wind farms and solar power. All that, plus the nation’s only domestic manufacturer of nuclear power generation equipment all right in our own back yard, and it’s easy to see why this region has so rapidly become a beehive of activity for industries and international investors seeking to capitalize on these vast energy resources. It’s also been a boon for a lot of abstractors and examiners across the region, myself included, who felt the pinch of the recession when many of the smaller local title agencies and mortgage brokers closed their doors.

Current estimates are that the Marcellus Shale, the huge rock formation which runs throughout most of the Appalachian Basin, contains enough natural gas to meet the energy needs of the entire nation well into the next decade. Interest in Marcellus gas has attracted billions of dollars in international investment from firms in China and Great Britain. Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, which recently relocated its corporate headquarters to a brand-new 775,000 square-foot facility in Cranberry Township, Butler County, plans to hire as many as 1,000 people, according to a recent article in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Company officials cite the rapid expansion of the nuclear energy industry worldwide as the reason for that growth.

Just last year, as a paralegal consultant at Westinghouse’s Legal & Contracts Group, I had the privilege of working closely with many of the attorneys and other professionals involved in contract negotiations for the company’s AP1000 nuclear reactor program. Four AP1000 plants are currently under construction in China, with a total of 12 units scheduled to go online in that country sometime in 2014 or 2015. Here in the US, the AP1000 reactor design has already received preliminary approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and at this writing, NRC license applications for the construction of fourteen reactors at seven power plants across the country are pending.

A recent Penn State University study sponsored by the Marcellus Shale Coalition predicts that natural gas producers will spend over $8 billion in 2010, generating about $790 million in state and local tax revenues and creating more than 88,000 jobs, more than double the numbers from 2009. But critics in the environmental movement have expressed concerns over the method of extracting natural gas from shale formations by a process known as “fracking” (short for “fracturing”).

Gas drilling by Cabot Oil & Gas of Houston, Texas caused problems in a small township in Susquehanna County when methane gas seeped into the water supply through a cracked underground casing in one of Cabot’s gas wells. In response, the state Department of Environmental Protection ordered Cabot to plug the wells and gave the company 30 days to supply the affected residents with water treatment systems at its own expense. In addition, Cabot was hit with nearly a quarter million dollars in fines and has been barred from drilling any new wells for at least a year.

As you can well imagine, all this talk of jobs, energy production and environmental hazards has become fodder for local candidates on both sides of the aisle seeking to score political points with their respective constituencies. Senator Bob Casey, Jr. (D-PA), for example has introduced a bill that would remove the long-standing exemption from the federal Clean Water Act that allows hydrofracking. Critics of the bill contend that there has never been an instance of contamination of ground water by fracking.

A proposed three-year moratorium on leases for gas drilling on state-owned lands has passed in the state House of Representatives. Lame duck Governor Edward G. Rendell (D-PA) has promised that he will sign the bill if it reaches his desk. Rendell also advocates a severance tax on natural gas production, a measure supported by Allegheny County Executive and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Dan Onorato. His Republican challenger, Attorney General Tom Corbett opposes the moratorium, saying that it will discourage energy development and cost the state jobs. Corbett instead favors a tax on the royalties produced by oil and gas leases on public lands, rather than a severance tax as a means of raising revenue.

In my view, regulation and oversight is best handled by the state authorities, who are closer to the concerns of the citizens and are therefore in a better position to respond to any issues that may arise. Believe me, having clean water to drink is just as important to me as it is to anyone. No one in their right mind wants to have to deal with dirty air or water. At the same time, however, I’m also a big fan of having a job, being able to pay my bills, taking hot showers and keeping warm in the dead of winter. I dunno, call me crazy.

Who's Minding the Store?

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:07:43 EST

Well, the 'net is buzzing once again with news of the latest screw-up by Bank of America. Seems that they took possession on the wrong house...again. My question is: how does a thing like this keep happening with the same company over and over again?

This time, it's Angela Iannelli of Gibsonia, PA just north of Pittsburgh who is the victim of BoA's gaffe. But she's not taking things lying down and has filed suit against the bank.

"If you or I did to Bank of America what Bank of America did to my client, we would be in prison for 10 years," says attorney Michael Rosenzweig, a partner at Edgar Snyder & Associates, the law firm which represents Ms. Iannelli.

The suit, filed Monday in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court, alleges that the bank's third-party contractor Snyder Property Services of Ebensburg, PA damaged her furniture, cut off the utilities to the house, put dangerous chemicals in the drains and water fixtures, removed Ms. Iannelli's pet parrot and padlocked the house.

According to Attorney Rosenzweig, the contractor "[t]ook her family pet of 10 years and denied any involvement in it for over a week before they finally told her how she could seek retrieval of her pet." She did eventually get her parrot back, but had to drive to Ebensburg, Cambria County some 80 miles away to do so. Ms. Iannelli says that she has always made her payments on time and that her mortgage has never been in default. Under Pennsylvania law, a lender must give a 10-day notice before entry of default and notice of intent to foreclose at least 60 days before any proceedings are initiated.

This isn't the first time Bank of America has pulled a stunt like this. Similar cases in Florida and Texas have resulted in a spate of lawsuits against the mortgage giant, which recently took ownership of Countrywide Financial. One guy whose home was wrongfully siezed doesn't even have a mortgage with BoA.

I could see this happening in an isolated incident, after all, with all the foreclosure activity taking place, someone was bound to get careless. But my question is how does a thing like this keep happening over and over again, and with the same lender? Who at Bank of America is responsible for seeing to it that proper procedure is being followed? A little due diligence on the part of the contractor could have gone a long way toward avoiding a lot of hassles for Ms. Iannelli and the others as well. Maybe I'm thinking too much like a researcher, but it seems to me that a trip to the local courthouse to verify the defaulting borrower's name and address could have prevented this from happening. For its part, BoA says it's "sincerely sorry" for the mixup and says it has "zero tolerance for this kind of error."

Yeah, and as Dr. Phil would say, "how's that workin' for ya?"

This Land Is Our Land (?)

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:57:38 EST

A secret memo by the US Department of the Interior has exposed an Obama administration proposal to put millions of acres of land off-limits to commercial activity and economic development. The impact of such a move could be particularly devastating at a time when the nation is struggling to recover from recession and job-creating investment is badly needed.

The memo, marked “NOT FOR RELEASE” was recently leaked by an unnamed Interior Department insider and circulated by US Representative Rob Bishop (R-UT). It identifies fourteen specific tracts in nine western states which the administration could close off completely by designating them as federal monuments using a little-known federal statute known as the American Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 U.S.C. § 431, et seq.) —all without public comment or legislative action.

As Professor Richard Pipes, former director of the Russian Research Center at Harvard University puts it, “you can have tyranny with property, but you cannot have freedom and the rule of law without it.” The founders of our nation knew this, that private ownership of property—and private ownership of land in particular—is the bulwark of a free society. It was that guiding principle which led them to draft the Declaration of Independence in 1776. The Treaty of Paris, which officially ended the American Revolution in 1783 brought an end to the sovereign right of the King to own and control lands in the colonies. It is important to note here that the treaty was not between England and the federal government, which at that time did not yet exist.

“His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.”

Paris Peace Treaty of 1783, Article One (emphasis mine)

That is why in drafting the Constitution, the framers set forth the only instance in which the United States as a sovereign power is permitted to own land:

"To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;”

U.S. Constitution, Article One, Section 8, Clause 17 (emphasis mine)

One of the issues the Constitution was intended to settle was the question of equal sovereignty among the Several States. The Equal Footing Doctrine is the Constitutional principle whose intent was to guarantee the rights of the states to be equal in their sovereign authority. Yet, the federal government, through a series of unconstitutional takings, now owns close to 650 million acres of land. That’s nearly 30% of the total land area of the United States, according to nationalatlas.gov. Almost 98% of the state of Alaska, 86% of Nevada and approximately 65% of all land west of the 100^th meridian are under federal ownership, which flies in the face of the “equal footing” principle envisioned by the framers.

This certainly wouldn’t be the first administration to utilize the Antiquities Act in such a fashion. President Jimmy Carter used the Act to seize over 50 million acres of land in Alaska, more than any than any of his predecessors. President Bill Clinton effectively ended energy development in southern Utah by creating the 1.7 million acre Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument, including the Kaiparowits Plateau, which contains the nation’s largest undeveloped field of low-sulfur, low polluting coal. Only two other locations of such coal exist worldwide. One is a remote area of Colombia in South America; the other is Kalimantan Island, Indonesia. Mr. Clinton defended his actions at the time, citing environmental concerns. Some media watchdog groups, however, have criticized the move as a political favor to longtime Clinton associate James Riady, whose development firm the Lippo Group held a majority interest in the Kalimantan coal field. Taking the Kaiparowits coal off-line gave Lippo a virtual monopoly on the environmentally friendly coal.

I’m sure that everyone reading this knows about some of the financial troubles plaguing the nation of Greece. According to an article in the UK Guardian, German politicians have floated the idea that Greece should consider selling off some of its assets, including the Aegean Islands, which are under state ownership, and even such ancient treasures as the Acropolis and the Parthenon to meet its financial obligations to the European Union. How much of a stretch is it to consider that China could demand that we sell off such landmarks as Mount Rushmore or Yellowstone National Park to make good on some of the $750 billion of our debt that they still own?

International political implications aside, this kind of federal control of the means of production is something that I find personally disturbing, for a host of reasons. Taking these lands out of the hands of farmers, miners and energy producers stifles our ability to compete in the world economy. Right now, this nation possesses sufficient resources to not only provide much-needed jobs to its citizens, but to retire our debt and to achieve economic self-sufficiency well into the next decade. But no, say the environmental extremists. It’s much more important to save a snail darter than to ensure our nation’s economic security and energy independence. One rancher was forced off of his 180,000-acre ranch by federal officials from the US Forest service who asserted claims of ownership, despite the fact that the rancher’s family had legally owned and worked the land for more than 100 years. This is just one example of hundreds of productive, law-abiding citizens whose lives have been turned upside-down by over-zealous environmentalists, backed by the full weight and force of federal power and bureaucracy.

Hey, here’s an idea…why don't we give these guys total control over our healthcare system!

The Christmas Adventure

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:21:33 EST

This story was passed along to me by a dear friend, and I thought I would share it here as a Christmas present to the membership of Source of Title. May the peace, joy and love of the Lord Jesus Christ be with all of you throughout 2010.

Adventure With Grandma

I remember my first Christmas adventure with Grandma. I was just a kid. I remember tearing across town on my bike to visit her on the day my big sister dropped the bomb: "There is no Santa Claus," she jeered, “even dummies know that!"

My Grandma was not the gushy kind, never had been. I fled to her that day because I knew she would be straight with me. I knew Grandma always told the truth, and I knew that the truth always went down a whole lot easier when swallowed with one of her world-famous cinnamon buns. I knew they were world-famous, because Grandma said so. It had to be true. Grandma was home, and the buns were still warm. Between bites, I told her everything. She was ready for me.

"No Santa Claus!" she snorted. "Ridiculous! Don't believe it. That rumour has been going around for years, and it makes me mad, plain mad. Now, put on your coat, and let's go."

"Go? Go where, Grandma?" I asked. I hadn't even finished my second world-famous, cinnamon bun. "Where" turned out to be Kerby's General Store, the one store in town that had a little bit of just about everything. As we walked through its doors, Grandma handed me ten dollars. That was a bundle in those days.

"Take this money," she said, "and buy something for someone who needs it. I'll wait for you in the car." Then she turned and walked out of Kerby's. I was only eight years old. I'd often gone shopping with my mother, but never had I shopped for anything all by myself. The store seemed big and crowded, full of people scrambling to finish their Christmas shopping. For a few moments I just stood there, confused, clutching that ten-dollar bill, wondering what to buy, and who on earth to buy it for.

I thought of everybody I knew: my family, my friends, my neighbors, the kids at school, the people who went to my church. I was just about thought out, when I suddenly thought of Bobby Decker. He was a kid with bad breath and messy hair, and he sat right behind me in Mrs. Pollock's grade-two class.

Bobby Decker didn't have a coat. I knew that because he never went out for recess during the winter. His mother always wrote a note, telling the teacher that he had a cough, but all we kids knew that Bobby Decker didn't have a cough, and he didn't have a coat. I fingered the ten-dollar bill with growing excitement..I would buy Bobby Decker a coat!

I settled on a red corduroy one that had a hood to it. It looked real warm, and he would like that. "Is this a Christmas present for someone?" the lady behind the counter asked kindly, as I laid my ten dollars down. "Yes," I replied shyly. "It's .... for Bobby." The nice lady smiled at me. I didn't get any change, but she put the coat in a bag and wished me a Merry Christmas.

That evening, Grandma helped me wrap the coat in Christmas paper and ribbons (a little tag fell out of the coat, and Grandma tucked it in her Bible) and wrote on the package, "To Bobby, From Santa Claus" -- Grandma said that Santa always insisted on secrecy. Then she drove me over to Bobby Decker's house, explaining as we went that I was now and forever officially one of Santa's helpers.

Grandma parked down the street from Bobby's house, and she and I crept noiselessly and hid in the bushes by his front walk Then Grandma gave me a nudge. "All right, Santa Claus," she whispered, "get going."

I took a deep breath, dashed for his front door, threw the present down on his step, pounded his doorbell and flew back to the safety of the bushes and Grandma. Together we waited breathlessly in the darkness for the front door to open. Finally it did, and there stood Bobby.

Fifty years haven't dimmed the thrill of those moments spent shivering, beside my Grandma, in Bobby Decker's bushes. That night, I realized that those awful rumours about Santa Claus were just what Grandma said they were: ridiculous. Santa was alive and well, and we were on his team. I still have the Bible, with the tag tucked inside: $19.95.

He who has no Christmas in his heart will never find Christmas under a tree.

Veterans: It's Time To Say "Thank You"

bossman@jbizinfo.com (Scott L. Perry) — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:55:29 EST

Although this entry is a little off-topic for a real estate-related website like Source of Title, I hope that my readers will join me in honoring those who have sacrificed so much so that we can enjoy the freedom to pursue our great American Dream

In March of 2003, the 3^rd Battalion of the US Army’s elite 75^th Ranger Regiment was deployed to Iraq as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Their mission was to seize and secure the Haditha Dam on the Euphrates River, making it possible for the Army’s 3^rd Infantry Division to continue their advance on Baghdad. On 3 April 2003, Sergeant Jeremy Feldbusch of Blairsville, PA was a member of that outfit, serving as a mortarman when he was severely injured by a piece of shrapnel and lost his eyesight during an intense artillery barrage.

In the true fighting spirit of the Army Rangers, Sergeant Feldbusch has not let his injuries stop him from helping others. With the support of a loving family at his side, he has become the first national spokesman for the Wounded Warrior Project. Along with his parents, Charlene and Brace, he works to raise awareness of the needs of his fellow wounded warriors. His story is the subject of a documentary entitled “Home Front”.

Sergeant Feldbusch’s decorations and honors include the Purple Heart; the Bronze Star with Valor; the National Defense Service Medal; the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal; the Army Service Ribbon; the Overseas Service Ribbon; the Combat Infantryman Badge; the Parachutist Badge with Combat Distinguishing Device; the One Bronze Star; the Ranger Tab; the Overseas Service Bar; the Forces Parachutist Badge; the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal; and German Jump Wings.

God’s Word, in John 15:13 tells us, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” We are truly blessed to live in a nation which produces people of such great character and courage like Sergeant Feldbusch, who voluntarily sacrifice so much for people they don’t even know. Someone once asked Sergeant Feldbusch how he felt about his military service; he said he had no regrets, remarking that, “if [he] still had one good eye left, [he’] be banging on the Army’s door asking them to let [him] back in.”

Not everyone who has served our country has worn a military uniform, however. Countless others have answered the call to duty right here on the homefront, keeping our boys on the front lines supplied with the food, clothing, tools and equipment they needed to fight the good fight for our beloved America.

Such were the men and women who served with the Manhattan Project. Begun in mid-1942, the Manhattan Project was a top-secret joint military-civilian effort by the United States to develop an atomic weapon capable of bringing the war to a swift close. There were three sites which comprised the Manhattan Engineer District: Los Alamos, New Mexico; Hanford, Washington; and Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

My grandfather, Hallie Nolen Perry was a journeyman lineman for the Clinton Engineer Works at Oak Ridge, Tennessee and was involved in the construction phase of the three main plants which were built to refine raw uranium ore into the fissionable material neccessary to produce the Atomic Bomb. He worked for various civilian contractors during that time, after which he was employed as Chief Fire Alarm Technician for the entire Oak Ridge reservation.

Wartime security at Oak Ridge was so tight that even those working on the project had no idea what they were building until after the war. All personnel, including townsite residents, were required to wear color-coded ID badges. Each color code gave the bearer access to specified areas within the project. My grandfather wore what was commonly referred to as a "rainbow" badge, which granted him unquestioned authority to access any building or facility on the reservation.

The work being undertaken at Oak Ridge was cloaked in such secrecy that residents of the surrounding communities could only guess at what was taking place right in their own back yard. A common saying of the time was, "Tons and tons of stuff goes in, but nothing ever comes out!"

On 6 August 1945, the nation and the world discovered the true purpose of the Manhattan Project. Two atomic bombs were dropped, first on Hiroshima, then three days later, Nagasaki, forcing the unconditional surrender of the Japanese Empire on 15 August 1945.

I dedicate this blog entry to all of the men and women, past and present who have worn the cloth of their country, and particularly those like Sergeant Jeremy Feldbusch, who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country and their fellow citizens, as well as to the memory of my "Papaw" Perry and others like him who served in secrecy right here at home to assure our victory and secure to us the blessings of this great land. Please join me this Veteran's Day in thanking these truly "Great Americans". If you see a vet, shake his/her hand. Tell them how much their service honors us. Offer to buy them dinner, or consider a donation to a worthy organization like the Wounded Warrior Project. They've been there for us...let's be there for them.

Respectfully submitted,
Scott L. Perry