Dog Fight at “The Towers”
By Kimberly Gomez, Ledger Contributing Writer
Shannon Van Dorn with “Indie” in front of their Los Feliz Towers home. LOS FELIZ—When Shannon Van Dorn and her 12-year-old golden retriever, Indie moved into their 4th floor condominium in the Los Feliz Towers last April they were drawn by the spacious balcony with a view of the Los Feliz Hills. Van Dorn’s lease gave her permission to have her dog but within weeks after settling in, the 43-year-old received notice that Indie’s size violated the condominimum’s homeowners association’s (HOA) rules that restricts pets to weighing no more than 25 lbs. She was told she needed to remove her 75 lb. pet from the unit. “Her landlord neglected to inform her of the rules when she moved in and that is between her and her landlord,” said Glen Kulik, an attorney representing the Towers. Since then, Van Dorn has requested an exception to the rule. It was denied. The HOA has filed a lawsuit against Van Dorn, who has, thus far, been unwilling to move Indie out. Then, in September, the HOA lost its bid for a preliminary injunction to have Indie removed pending the outcome of the case. And now, Van Dorn—who is also an attorney—has filed her own countersuit saying the HOA’s weight restriction for pets violates state law. According to Van Dorn’s claim, the HOA’s rule unreasonably dictates the type of dog a homeowner may have. In her suit, Van Dorn cites California Civil Code section 1360.5 that specifically allows a condominium owner to keep one of “any” dog, cat, bird or fish subject to reasonable rules and regulations of the association. Van Dorn claims that the statute has not been challenged since it was implemented by the California Legislature in January 2001 and a ruling in this case may set a precedent for renters across the state. “The issue is you should be able to have the kind of dog that you like and that fits your personality,” said Van Dorn. No complaints of noise or incidents have been made about Indie, other than the issue of his size. “Yes we have very strict rulings in our HOA,” said resident Bryan Rabin. “Whether I feel that’s a good or a bad thing, that’s just a personal choice. But the building is in great shape and it was built in 1966.” Other residents disagreed. “The current 25 lb. limit is ridiculous as far as I’m concerned,” said resident, Joe O’Leary. He added that he and his wife are planning to get a large dog if Van Dorn succeeds with her countersuit. FTC Sets New Guidelines for Endorsements, Testimonials
Oct 7, 2009 Response This Week
WASHINGTON – The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced the approval of final revisions to the Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising, which address endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations and celebrities, as well as the disclosure of important connections between advertisers and endorsers.
The guidelines, last updated in 1980, now state that advertisements featuring a consumer and conveying an experience with a product or service as “typical” when that is not the case, will be required to clearly disclose what consumers should generally expect. The earlier version of this guideline allowed advertisers to describe the consumer’s experience as long as they included a “results not typical” disclaimer. “This could have far-reaching effects on advertisers. No longer will direct marketers and advertisers be able to highlight their ‘best’ testimonial – feeling that they will have zero liability by placing the obligatory ‘results not typical’ disclaimer language on the ad,” says Shannon L. Van Dorn, Esq. “This means that in order to avoid potential regulatory hot water, they will have tout the ‘average’ testimonial – and not the exceptional one.”Other new guidelines address endorsements by bloggers or word-of-mouth marketers, stating anyone who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. This is the first-ever Act addressing bloggers and others in non-traditional media.Finally, the Guides address celebrity endorsers, for the first time making them liable for false or unsubstantiated claims.In reaction to the announcement, the Electronic Retailing Association (ERA), which had fought to keep the regulations from becoming too restrictive, issued a statement and offered guidance on how to keep endorsement and testimonial ads in line with the Act.“Like the FTC, ERA fully supports enforcement against businesses and individuals that cut corners, and jeopardize the healthy and vibrant $300 billion electronic retailing sector,” says Julie Coons, president and CEO of ERA. “As leaders in self-regulation, we look forward to partnering with the FTC to ensure the relevant communities are educated and fully able to comply before they become involved in costly legal challenges.”