@Matthew Trotter Purchasing a home as an owner occupant, fulfilling the residency requirements (normally 1-2 years depending on the loan) then moving out to a new house that you will owner occupy is perfectly legal. 

They both fulfill nearly the same functions, but people investing in CA, and from CA, can avoid the annual franchise tax that will hit you for $800 per LLC or series.

Owner could say they followed the spirit of the agreement and did not receive any insurance payout, but never put in requisite effort to complete claim process because they didn't really have to in order to fulfill contract terms.

Even though there's no monetary gain on my end with her first deal (next time I should charge a mentoring fee - LOL), I am including it here as part of "The Good" because I feel proud of her and I get a sense of fulfillment helping people.

I hear that the area is developing fulfillment centers, jobs, etc.Is anybody investing here?

Best of luck in your journey - you're in for a wild (but very fulfilling) ride! 

Chattanooga would fulfill all those.

There is some criticism of the continued existence of these statutes, as they are often used by parties who freely entered into fair contracts yet wish to avoid having to fulfill their agreements.

As someone else mentioned, it's a larger issue than real estate investing - it's a societal issue and an issue of the nature of capitalism. 

I prefer presently NE Euclid, NE of the brand spanking new Fulfillment Center and Lake County.