Consumerist
Reader (and lawyer) Sam Glover says:
"It sounds to me like Javin accepted their offer to terminate his lease. Sure, they pressured him to do it, but as he said, he "moved out rather than deal with it any longer." What they really did was take advantage of your ignorance of the law.
The reason why no lawyer will take your case isn't that the company owns the state (even if that highly dubious statement is true), it is that (1) you have no claim, and (2) you have no—or only minimal—damages."
Seems sensible, now that you think about it. Really, what could he legally protest? His own decision?
In any event, Javin's anti-ARMC protest will live on until they unplug the internet.
Previously: Apartment Complex Evicts With Fake Excuses So It Can Raise Rent 40%
