Epstein Secrets

existing caretaker's cottage as well as the construction of additional living space adjacent to the cottage. As discussed with you at the meeting, Great St. Jim submitted two minor permit applications to your office on July 14, 2017. On August 23, 2017, we received a notification of deficiency from J.P. Orio

e hurricanes, it provided the completed information by hand delivery on February 8, 2018. During our meeting, you stated that DPNR sent a letter to Great St. Jim in April 2018 regarding the insufficiency of the permit applications. However, this is completely at odds with our review of the matter. In fact, in

ng as it was only for the limited purpose of inspecting and ascertaining compliance at the areas of permitted sites with the terms and conditions of Great St. Jim's coastal zone permits. In other words, we certainly would not object to your coming to GSJ to review compliance with the permits that were granted, b

t's 'very core' stands 'the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion."' Ibid. (quoting Silverman v. United States, 365 U. S. 505, 511 (1961)). To give full practical effect to that right, the Court considers curtilage "the area 'immediately surrounding and asso

existing caretaker's cottage as well as the construction of additional living space adjacent to the cottage. As discussed with you at the meeting, Great St. Jim submitted two minor permit applications to your office on July 14, 2017. On August 23, 2017, we received a notification of deficiency from J.P. Orio

e hurricanes, it provided the completed information by hand delivery on February 8, 2018. During our meeting, you stated that DPNR sent a letter to Great St. Jim in April 2018 regarding the insufficiency of the permit applications. However, this is completely at odds with our review of the matter and neither

ng as it was only for the limited purpose of inspecting and ascertaining compliance at the areas of permitted sites with the terms and conditions of Great St. Jim's coastal zone permits. In other words, we certainly would not object to your coming to GSJ to review compliance with the permits that were granted, b

t's 'very core' stands 'the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion."' Ibid. (quoting Silverman v. United States, 365 U. S. 505, 511 (1961)). To give full practical effect to that right, the Court considers curtilage "the area 'immediately surrounding and asso

y on February 8, 2018. EFTA00794163 Letter to Y. Norman February 13, 2019 Page 2 of 4 During our meeting, you stated that DPNR sent a letter to Great St. Jim in April 2018 regarding the insufficiency of the permit applications. However, this is completely at odds with our review of the matter and neither

existing caretaker's cottage as well as the construction of additional living space adjacent to the cottage. As discussed with you at the meeting, Great St. Jim submitted two (2) minor permit applications to your office on July 14, 2017. On August 23, 2017, we received a notification of deficiency from J.P.

ng as it was only for the limited purpose of inspecting and ascertaining compliance at the areas of permitted sites with the terms and conditions of Great St. Jim's coastal zone permits. In other words, we certainly would not object to your coming to GSJ to review compliance with the permits that were granted, b

t's 'very core' stands 'the right of a man to retreat into his own home and there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion."' Ibid. (quoting Silverman v. United States, 365 U. S. 505, 511 (1961)). To give full practical effect to that right, the Court considers curtilage "the area 'immediately surrounding and asso