...having read that thread, Charles said their INTENT was to keep the court from using a broom closet to make the whole building off limits, but offices where living human beings work is hardly the same as a closet full of janitorial equipment...and, since the law was written to protect courts, court offices, and the people within them, I don't buy that as explaining this...Keith B wrote:Just a follow-up on this discussion for portion of a building. See this thread: viewtopic.php?p=26165#p26165" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and Charles' interpretation when the verbiage was put into the statute and why it is worded that way.
Again, no case law, so Charles says it is not 100%, but his interpretation agrees with the intent and my interpretation.
...it is indeed ambiguous...and common sense is not law...I will remain of the same opinion until proven wrong...that's the safer of the two options, since it's far from clear in the law...and the clarification hasn't happened in 5 years...
...now, if you'd get off your horse, I'd be honored to buy you a sassyparilla...