Reply to a comment

Reply to this comment

marcomermaid writes:

in response to 20_Days:

4MarcoIsland,

I went this morning to actually look at the deed and I have some questions regarding this post.

What you printed says "School Site" No.2. and further state what and where that particular site is.

It does not say "School Sites" meaning more than one, from my understanding of singular Site as compared to Sites being plural.

The section that is printed after "also" is in a different font and appears to have been added at a later time.

"Also" does not mean anything, but we are including this for some reason and not being specific. (They could have included a piece of property the size of the Park on the corner of Collier and Barfield. Would that too have been a site for a school?) Why did they NOT intentially, or specifically want to refer to it, what you are claiming, as School Site 3 as they did for School Sites 1 and 2? It does not state School site 3 for Tract K.

I think we need more than some layman, which is you or me, to determine the meaning of this legal document. I also do not "know" why the Mackles did what they did 40 years ago.

Pilar, you make good points. As people seem to disagree on what the deed says, "more than a layman" should interpret the deed. As you---or someone recently stated: it is a legal document and means more than what the Mackles did 40 years ago. So now the question---WHO could make this determination?

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features