Tech billionaire Prince sues Park City neighbors over ‘menacing’ dogs amid home battle - Guess the breed.

Article
https://archive.is/Z04YI


The two dogs, Sasha and Mocha, the lawsuit calls "menacing." The owners say they have never received a complaint prior to this week's lawsuit.

Park City billionaire couple Matthew and Tatiana Prince have filed a lawsuit over their neighbors' "menacing" dogs.​

The Princes’ neighbors, Eric and Susan Hermann, recently filed an appeal seeking to reverse approval of the Prince's home plans, claiming the project isn’t in line with local development rules.
This week the Princes’ attorney filed a lawsuit against the Hermanns seeking damages for trespassing, private nuisance, and violation of a trail easement.
The complaint specifically calls out the Hermanns’ two Bernese Mountain dogs, Sasha and Mocha.
It says the dogs, each weighing over 100 pounds, are “menacing” and have aggressively chased and harassed those nearby. The suit also alleges the Hermann’s consistently walk the dogs unleashed on the Treasure Hill trail that runs along the perimeter of the Prince property, in violation of city code.
The complaint calls the Hermanns “elderly and frail,” claiming they can’t control the dogs. Attorney Bruce Baird, who is representing the Princes, declined to provide additional comment about the suit.
The Hermanns told KPCW they have never received a complaint about their dogs.
In a statement, Eric Hermann said the timing of the civil complaint is not shocking given their appeal of the Prince home. He said the lawsuit “not only falsely and viciously attacks our gentle dogs but also argues that all dogs should be excluded from pedestrian easements in Park City.”
Along with damages, the lawsuit is aiming to ban the Hermanns from bringing their dogs on the trail that connects to their backyard.

The Hermanns’ appeal of the Princes’ home, which is co-signed by eight other neighbors, will be reviewed by Park City’s three-member appeal panel April 30.

Matthew Prince is the founder and CEO of cybersecurity company Cloudflare, and the second wealthiest person in Utah with a net worth over $3 billion, according to Forbes. Matthew and his wife Tatiana own The Park Record.

 

[Twinkie]

He wants to ban dogs (including dogs on leads) from all pedestrian easements in the area.

Do you know what a pedestrian easement is? It's not a trail. So idk the point of all those pics you posted.

the most dog friendly place in the US,

And yet they still have leash laws.

To me, that scrubby mountainside looks like the perfect place to let dogs run around off the lead.

On your neighbor's property? This is how your dog gets shot. If you're okay with that then by all means let your dog run around off-leash. We're not just talking about the trail.

I think it's cruel to have a big dog (like these Bernese dogs) and only ever walk them on the lead, not letting them use up their energy by running around.

That's what fenced acreage and dog parks are for. If you can't provide that, don't get a massive dog like a berner. Again, other people are not obligated to tolerate your dog being a nuisance.

 

[AssignedEva]

Do you know what a pedestrian easement is? It's not a trail. So idk the point of all those pics you posted.

I actually don't know what a pedestrian easement is - I assumed when Americans talked about it, they meant something similar to our "right of way", namely a footpath that is on private land but the public are allowed access to.

On your neighbor's property? This is how your dog gets shot. If you're okay with that then by all means let your dog run around off-leash. We're not just talking about the trail.
That's what fenced acreage and dog parks are for. If you can't provide that, don't get a massive dog like a berner. Again, other people are not obligated to tolerate your dog being a nuisance

I thought it might be a cultural difference. We don't have dog parks here, dogs are de facto allowed off leads (they must be kept under control) but should be kept on leads near farmland (farmers have a right to shoot dogs who worry livestock), in nature reserves and certain beaches and fenced park areas will have a ban on dogs at certain times of the year. But otherwise woodland, moors, beaches etc are all fine to have dogs off leads.

Regardless, he's not trying to say people aren't allowed dogs on his property, he's saying he wants to stop people having dogs on any of the trails and footpaths in the area. He doesn't own that mountain, it seems to be owned by the local ski resort, who presumably have no issue with locals walking their dogs there and so wouldn't shoot the dogs (although I imagine they'd take a dim view of it during skiing season). He just doesn't like dogs and doesn't want to encounter dogs when walking on trails, in which case as I said, he shouldn't have moved to a dog friendly small town.

 

[Twinkie]

Regardless, he's not trying to say people aren't allowed dogs on his property, he's saying he wants to stop people having dogs on any of the trails and footpaths in the area.

Again, he's talking about pedestrian access easement.

It's not a nature trail or whatever you're trying to say it is. An easement is basically like a shared driveway. He's proposing it for everyone because it doesn't make sense to propose it just for the one easement he and the Hermanns share.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about this. They were being faggots by trying to stop him from building a house on the land he bought, even though it was already approved. So he's turning around and fucking with them back.

 

[AssignedEva]

It's not a nature trail or whatever you're trying to say it is. An easement is basically like a shared driveway. He's proposing it for everyone because it doesn't make sense to propose it just for the one easement he and the Hermanns share

He's talking about banning all dogs from easements, not just their dogs. And the issue he has is with them is the public easement they access behind their house, which is the Treasure Hill Trail. So to me it sounds like he's trying to push to stop people walking dogs on trails, because if that mountain is privately owned by the ski resort then any trails on it would presumably be public easements.

 

[Twinkie]

He's talking about banning all dogs from easements, not just their dogs. And the issue he has is with them is the public easement they access behind their house, which is the Treasure Hill Trail. So to me it sounds like he's trying to push to stop people walking dogs on trails, because if that mountain is privately owned by the ski resort then any trails on it would presumably be public easements.

It's his property. If it wasn't his property there wouldn't have been a prexisting written agreement.

CONDITIONAL ACCESS

Why can't dog owners just not be entitled narcissistic faggots? If you INSIST on violating the law by having your dogs run around off-leash, they better be well-behaved and you better clean up after them (hint: this never happens).

If you're not going to behave then you don't get to cry when you are held accountable. These rich old kikes just aren't used to being held accountable. They're actually trying to start up some social media campaign to "save sasha and mocha!!!" Save them from what? Their owners having to obey the law?

 

[Montalbane]

Again, he's talking about pedestrian access easement.
View attachment 5940777
It's not a nature trail or whatever you're trying to say it is. An easement is basically like a shared driveway. He's proposing it for everyone because it doesn't make sense to propose it just for the one easement he and the Hermanns share.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about this. They were being faggots by trying to stop him from building a house on the land he bought, even though it was already approved. So he's turning around and fucking with them back.

Matthew you are a faggot and I hope you get eaten alive by BIG FEROCIOUS BERNESE DOGS

Faggot

 

[Xarpho's Return]

If it wasn't true they'd deny it. They'd have said "it's not tr00!" rather than "haha no one ever complained before you"

That's not what they said. Did you even read the article?

I don't have to have any faith in the character of Prince to believe these whiny old rich jews

Where do you get the idea that they're Jewish? Just because they filed a lawsuit first?

feel entitled to let their dogs run around off-leash, shitting everywhere and chasing people

I'm not blaming you for hating "dog culture" (including taking your dog into stores/restaurants) but this is just projection.

Prince admits it's a retaliatory lawsuit which is frankly based.

Oh, so just because he admits it is a retaliatory lawsuit that makes him okay and not a vengeful, petty asshole?

 

[FierceBrosnan]

tl;dr: Matt Prince is a massive faggot and should be burned as such.

 

[Twinkie]

Where do you get the idea that they're Jewish? Just because they filed a lawsuit first?

Uhh because Hermann is a jewish name? Because she has ties to the entertainment industry? Look them up yourself they are obviously jews. Do you not understand how rich everyone involved in this is?

Oh, so just because he admits it is a retaliatory lawsuit that makes him okay and not a vengeful, petty asshole?

Why are the ones who started this (the crusty old kikes) not considered petty, vengeful assholes that were mad because someone with more money moved in and was going to build a new house? Prince didn't do anything wrong and his plans were approved. They kvetched and appealed that decision and tried to fuck him over.

If you think Prince is being petty, fine, I don't disagree. What i don't understand is how anyone thinks the Hermanns aren't also being petty and not only that, they were the instigators.

People's brains turn to mush anytime a dog is involved apparently.

 

[KiwiFuzz2]

Ah yes, only Jews are named Hermann.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_G%C3%B6ring

 

[Twinkie]

Ah yes, only Jews are named Hermann.

Not sure why you're hung up on this point but they are literally jews you can look it up. It's not hard.

 

[Coldgrip]

So am I reading this right, that he wants to ban dogs from shared private driveways?

 

[repentance]

It's his property. If it wasn't his property there wouldn't have been a prexisting written agreement.
View attachment 5940852

That reads as though the Hermanns have more than one property.