2 stores in one building one posted and one is not

[lildave40]

This week I was traveling back from Laredo to Houston. I stopped at a gas Station that had a Jack in a box in the same building. When I was walking in I noticed the store was posted with both 30.06 and 30.07 sign. I looked at the Jack in a box doors and it was not posted. I opted to go somewhere else to eat. But my question is. Since the store was posted will that include the other store that did not is not posted.? 2 separate entrances but share the bathrooms and access to both place from the inside.

[Pariah3j]

I believe since the wording of the 2 signs use words like Property and Premises, it technically covers both assuming they are both the same entity. May be 2 separate businesses leasing the same building. IANAL so someone with more knowledge than myself may be able to shed more light on this.

[Abraham]

Simplify by doing business elsewhere you don't see such signs.

Nothing to figure out or guess.

That's how I'd handle it if I came across such confusion and yes, I too would be confused with such signage.

Easy.

[MikeyJ]

I believe since the wording of the 2 signs use words like Property and Premises, it technically covers both assuming they are both the same entity. May be 2 separate businesses leasing the same building. IANAL so someone with more knowledge than myself may be able to shed more light on this.

Posting needs to be at each entrance. If they post at the gas station entrance but not at the JiB entrance, you could enter the JiB. If the stores are connected inside, then I think the gas station would need to post again inside where the two stores are connected.

[MikeyJ]

Simplify by doing business elsewhere you don't see such signs.

Nothing to figure out or guess.

That's how I'd handle it if I came across such confusion and yes, I too would be confused with such signage.

Easy.

[Mel]

I believe since the wording of the 2 signs use words like Property and Premises, it technically covers both assuming they are both the same entity. May be 2 separate businesses leasing the same building. IANAL so someone with more knowledge than myself may be able to shed more light on this.

Posting needs to be at each entrance. If they post at the gas station entrance but not at the JiB entrance, you could enter the JiB. If the stores are connected inside, then I think the gas station would need to post again inside where the two stores are connected.

Posting at each entrance is required for 30.07, not so for 30.06.

[MikeyJ]

I believe since the wording of the 2 signs use words like Property and Premises, it technically covers both assuming they are both the same entity. May be 2 separate businesses leasing the same building. IANAL so someone with more knowledge than myself may be able to shed more light on this.

Posting needs to be at each entrance. If they post at the gas station entrance but not at the JiB entrance, you could enter the JiB. If the stores are connected inside, then I think the gas station would need to post again inside where the two stores are connected.

Posting at each entrance is required for 30.07, not so for 30.06.

True. But if it's posted on the entrance to the gas station but not posted at the entrance to the JiB, I don't know that the two are connected until I enter. At what point am I in violation of 30.06? Should I have known that the gas station and JiB were the same property on the inside, even though they appear separate from the outside? And if I approach from the far side of the JiB and can't see the signage at the gas station entrance, is the gas station posting "conspicuous" to the entrance of the JiB?

[Pariah3j]

I believe since the wording of the 2 signs use words like Property and Premises, it technically covers both assuming they are both the same entity. May be 2 separate businesses leasing the same building. IANAL so someone with more knowledge than myself may be able to shed more light on this.

Posting needs to be at each entrance. If they post at the gas station entrance but not at the JiB entrance, you could enter the JiB. If the stores are connected inside, then I think the gas station would need to post again inside where the two stores are connected.

Posting at each entrance is required for 30.07, not so for 30.06.

True. But if it's posted on the entrance to the gas station but not posted at the entrance to the JiB, I don't know that the two are connected until I enter. At what point am I in violation of 30.06? Should I have known that the gas station and JiB were the same property on the inside, even though they appear separate from the outside? And if I approach from the far side of the JiB and can't see the signage at the gas station entrance, is the gas station posting "conspicuous" to the entrance of the JiB?

This would be an easy decision for me, as I am not a fan of JIB. My best guess or how I would personally handle it, is if I didn't see the signs until I was in the JIB would be to ask, already been given notice at that point. But if I'm to understand it, if you were told don't worry about it or it does not apply in here, you would be in the clear.

[Soccerdad1995]

How would this be any different than multiple businesses located in an office building, where some businesses are posted and some are not?

And I don't think that common ownership has any impact. A business owner can post some businesses and not others can't they?

I guess, to be safe, you could have uncovered and OC'd into the JIB since that restaurant is clearly not compliantly posted per 30.07.

[C-dub]

What if neither business owns the building and both are leasing their space and the "owner" has put up or required the signs? As Mel has reminded us, only 30.07 is required at each entrance, while 30.06 is not.

As for multiple businesses being in the same building, this is just my opinion, but I would think sign placement is critical in a case such as this. If the sign were at an entrance to the building it would apply to the entire building. However, if either sign were at the entrance to a particular office within the building then only then only that businesses space would be off limits.

[Keith B]

While it is a VERY gray area, I would look at it like a posted mall with anchor stores. if the mall is posted, but the entrance to the anchor store is not, then since I don't have to enter the mall to go into the outside anchor store entrance, then the anchor store is not posted IMO. This would be my argument for defense if I was challenged on it.

So, if the station and Jack in the Box have a definitive 'line' between the two and you can enter one without going into the other, then that would be my argument as well.

[Bryanmc]

As Mel has reminded us, only 30.07 is required at each entrance, while 30.06 is not.

Why is that? Is it because they didn't have a way to modify 30.06 when 30.07 was created but wrote 30.07 to be more specific? When you think of large stores that have entrances on 3 sides of the building, how can a 30.06 posting at only one entrance be sufficient? Is it a defense if you entered through the unposted door and therefore weren't given notice?

*edit* Got called away and hit post after Keith had posted.

[MikeyJ]

While it is a VERY gray area, I would look at it like a posted mall with anchor stores. if the mall is posted, but the entrance to the anchor store is not, then since I don't have to enter the mall to go into the outside anchor store entrance, then the anchor store is not posted IMO. This would be my argument for defense if I was challenged on it.

So, if the station and Jack in the Box have a definitive 'line' between the two and you can enter one without going into the other, then that would be my argument as well.

Another example would be a strip mall, with each store front having its own access from the parking lot. Each of the businesses likely leases space from the owner, but each can decide whether to permit carry in their own store.

[C-dub]

As Mel has reminded us, only 30.07 is required at each entrance, while 30.06 is not.

Why is that? Is it because they didn't have a way to modify 30.06 when 30.07 was created but wrote 30.07 to be more specific? When you think of large stores that have entrances on 3 sides of the building, how can a 30.06 posting at only one entrance be sufficient? Is it a defense if you entered through the unposted door and therefore weren't given notice?

*edit* Got called away and hit post after Keith had posted.

I'm not sure exactly why, but that's what we ended up with. For large stores, like malls, I would go with what Keith B laid out. It might work and it might not. I suppose it would ultimately depend on who posted the sign and what the lease agreement states and how forgiving the judge is the day the case is presented to them because, so far, there is no case law on this type of violation.

[ScottDLS]

As Mel has reminded us, only 30.07 is required at each entrance, while 30.06 is not.

Why is that? Is it because they didn't have a way to modify 30.06 when 30.07 was created but wrote 30.07 to be more specific? When you think of large stores that have entrances on 3 sides of the building, how can a 30.06 posting at only one entrance be sufficient? Is it a defense if you entered through the unposted door and therefore weren't given notice?

*edit* Got called away and hit post after Keith had posted.

I'm not sure exactly why, but that's what we ended up with. For large stores, like malls, I would go with what Keith B laid out. It might work and it might not. I suppose it would ultimately depend on who posted the sign and what the lease agreement states and how forgiving the judge is the day the case is presented to them because, so far, there is no case law on this type of violation.

Or we may never know since in 19 years there haven't been any "test cases" and even then the ruling would only be applicable to the particular case unless is was an appeal from a lower court. Barring x-ray eyed cops, I would carry in the JiB and just not go into the gas station presuming I saw the 30.06 before I walked in.