DEFAULT

Romanowski custom homes filed bankruptcy

romanowski custom homes filed bankruptcy

Dec 26,  · The company is based in North Port and filed for bankruptcy on Dec. Its website is inactive. Calls to James’ attorney, Timothy Gensmer, went unanswered. James owns a . Mark Romanowski from Romanowski homes, Shavertown, PA builds houses with the cheapest available materials inch block foundation, low-end vanities, lighting, windows, bathtubs, showers and cabinets (of-the-shelf from Lowes or Home Depot). The only thing custom about a Romanowski home is the paint and siding he lets you pick out. Mark Romanowski is going to pocket 50 to $, on your home. Sep 04,  · See Correction/Clarification at end of article Reynolds Signature Homes, a Frisco-based builder of custom homes, has voluntarily filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Author: Bill Hethcock. romanowski custom homes filed bankruptcy

Related videos

Slocum Estates - Romanowski Custom Homes - Virtual Tour in Shavertown, PA

Its website is inactive. James owns a number of properties in Sarasota County, including a condo on Siesta Key, two single-family homes and two vacant lots in North Port. A Facebook page, apparently set up by victims of Elk Ridge Custom Homes, has been created to help connect customers that have homes in progress and would like to share information about the bankruptcy.

Tannenbaum has represented a number of clients with similar problems. You form a company, you show one or two houses that you built and give them no opportunity to vet.

To avoid the heartache, Tannenbaum suggests hiring a construction consultant and an attorney who will help look over the contract. Indeed if appellant's position on this point had merit we would be forced to the conclusion that nevertheless, under the confronting facts and circumstances, the city's zoning ordinance prohibits appellant's operation at his present location in the commercial zone.

Whatever else may be said it is clear from the record that in killing and slaughtering cattle and livestock under the conditions and circumstances related by him in his own testimony he was actually operating a super de luxe slaughterhouse.

It is equally clear that under the provisions of Section 5 1 the operation of such an enterprise was not even permitted in the industrial district of the city unless conducted and operated in accord with, and in conformity to, the requirements of the last paragraph of Section 5 heretofore quoted. Conceding, as appellant points out, that zoning ordinances are to be strictly construed See Babb v.

Rose, Kan. When that is done we entertain no doubt as to the correctness of the trial court's conclusions of law Nos.

We are unable to concur in his view that a zoning ordinance which prohibits a custom killer, a custom slaughterer, or a custom butcherer of livestock from conducting a business of that nature, even though as here it be carried on in a super de luxe slaughterhouse, in a commercial zone of a city under the conditions and circumstances disclosed by the instant record is unreasonable or in violation of the spirit and intent of G.

Under such circumstances appellant's contentions respecting the unreasonableness of the ordinance lack merit and cannot be upheld. Neither have we overlooked a contention the trial court's conclusion of law No. The trouble with this contention from appellant's standpoint is that he overlooks the fact this is an action for declaratory judgment and that under the allegations of the answer, and his reply thereto, such question was placed squarely in issue. Nor have we failed to note a claim the trial court erroneously excluded evidence respecting whether the city permitted poultry dressing and killing plants to operate in the commercial zone.

Assuming, without deciding, that this evidence was admissible for the purpose for which it was offered the record fails to make it appear such excluded testimony was brought to the attention of the trial court by affidavit or otherwise at the hearing of the motion for new trial in compliance with the requirements of G.

The result, under our decisions, is that this claim of error is not open to appellate review. Babb v. City of Wichita, Kan. Beam, Kan. Divers other contentions advanced by appellant have been given consideration. We find nothing in them or in the arguments advanced in their support which warrants a reversal of the judgment. Enter your email. Kilcoyne v. City of Coffeyville Annotate this Case. Opinion filed April 10, Walter S.

Keith, of Coffeyville, argued the cause and was on the briefs for the appellee. Richard L. Becker and Morris D. Hildreth, both of Coffeyville, as amici curiae. Plaintiff does now and since has owned the following described property in Coffeyville, Montgomery County, Kansas. Here follows description , and has conducted thereon the businesses alleged in his petition.

That the Defendant is a municipal corporation of the first class in Montgomery County, State of Kansas. That before September 8, , Plaintiff conducted that part of his business consisting of the killing slaughtering cattle and livestock for his purposes at a place outside the City Limits of the City of Coffeyville.

That on September 8, , Plaintiff completed an alteration and improvement of his premises and buildings for the purpose of conducting his killing and slaughtering operations therein in the Commercial District as defined by the zoning ordinances of the City of Coffeyville, rather than outside the City as before.

That since September 8, , Plaintiff has done his killing and slaughtering operations on his said premises in the Commercial District. That Plaintiff's killing and slaughtering operations are a kind of manufacture and treatment and not clearly incidental to the conduct of a retail business conducted on the premises. That Plaintiff's photographic exhibits accurately portray the places each purports to represent. That Plaintiff has used his premises in the Commercial District, as defined by the zoning ordinances of Coffeyville, for the purpose of killing, slaughtering, dressing and preparing for food purposes cattle and livestock.

The intent and purpose of such ordinance is to exclude from the City the business of killing and slaughtering animals for food purposes, unless conducted in the Industrial District under the limitations provided in the ordinance.

Plaintiff by such killing and slaughtering in the Commercial District has violated the zoning ordinance of said City. Judgment should be for Defendant. Residence District: In the Residence District no building or premises shall be used and no building shall be hereafter erected or structurally altered, unless otherwise provided in this ordinance, except for one or more of the following uses: Uses not involved and therefore not listed.

Commercial District: In the Commercial District all buildings and premises except as otherwise provided in this ordinance, may be used for any purpose permitted in the Resident District or for any other use except as the following: "1. Junk yards. Contractor's storage yard. Coal, Coke, or wood yard. Machine shop. Any kind of manufacture or treatment other than the manufacture or treatment of products clearly incidental to the conduct of a retail business conducted on the premises.

Provided, That no public garage shall have an entrance or exit for motor vehicles within three hundred feet of an entrance or exit of a public or private school ground, public library, church, hospital, children's or old people's home, or other similar public or semi-public institutions.

Public Abattoirs. Uses 2 to 23, incl. Excerpts from appellant's own testimony as abstracted read: " I sell meat and frozen foods to customers for storage in their lockers and home freezers. From the time I purchased this business I have also done custom killing for my customers, but prior to September 8, , the actual killing of the animals was done on Stark Avenue. After killing the animals we loaded them in a truck, took them to the premises on West 8th, finished the dressing, and put them in the refrigerator for chilling.

Beef is chilled a week to ten days and a hog two or three days. Afterward we cut up the meat according to instructions. Prior to September, , I had no facilities on West 8th Street for killing animals, but did for poultry My meat sales are made in different ways. I sell over the counter as retail sales to people who come in and buy meat for their home freezers or lockers in from maybe four or five or six pieces up to a carcass of beef, lamb, or pork; some come in for a piece of steak.

I supply locker and home freezer customers either by selling them meat, or by custom cutting of meat or animals they bring in to me.

2 thoughts on “Romanowski custom homes filed bankruptcy

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *