by oldandslow » Mon Jun 13, 2011 12:47 am
by fatdad » Mon Jun 13, 2011 2:05 am
by MoapaPk » Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:01 am
oldandslow wrote:Interesting legal question. First you need to determine what state law applies. The law of the state where the plaintiff viewed the SP post? The law of the stzte of residence of the person who made the post in question? The home state of SP? The applicable state law could make a big difference. Interesting article in WSJ about a recently proposed law in Hawaii. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 36050.html
by oldandslow » Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:46 am
by lcarreau » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:04 am
by Bob Sihler » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:18 am
Marmaduke wrote:Bryan Benn wrote:Arthur Digbee wrote:Perhaps we could hold state lawmakers liable for building roads on which people get into fatal accidents. That makes more sense.
I am tragically amused by the members of the woman's party blaming the guidebook author for her death after she became separated from the party and was never seen again. Where, exactly, were they?
And those who sell fuel at the pumps must be liable as well?
Can we go all the way back to the inventor of the "wheel"? No wheel, no buggy's, no cars, no fuel, no roads?
The wheel is to blame for all our ills.
by lcarreau » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:25 am
by CSUMarmot » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:41 am
You may get lost. You probably WILL get lost. The chances of getting lost multiply geometrically after the sun goes down, due to poor visibility. The sun goes down at least once a day in this area. Not to say that you won't get lost during daylight hours. In either event, carry a flashlight
by adventurer » Mon Jun 13, 2011 4:47 pm
by fatdad » Mon Jun 13, 2011 6:44 pm
oldandslow wrote:As far as some people having a perverse idea of what one can sue for, too many of those people are lawyers who do not have enough to do so they sue. Innocent defendants have to spend substantial amounts in order to defend themselves. It will be interesting to see how the new Texas statute requiring the loser to pay (in case of a groundless suit) plays out. Perhaps there are not enough "deep pockets" giving advice on SP to get the attention of the plaintiff's bar.
by MoapaPk » Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:20 pm
by Arthur Digbee » Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:40 pm
fatdad wrote:Lawyer here. People seem to have a really uninformed, almost perverse notion of what you can sue for.
by nartreb » Mon Jun 13, 2011 9:59 pm
First of all, lawyers represent clients. Lawyers do not dream up lawsuits because they have nothing better to do.
Lawyers are officers of the court and are also bound by their own state's rules of ethics or professional conduct. They are also subject to discipline and suspension/disbarment for unethical practices, which would include suing because one does "not have enough to do."
the legal system, which is designed to benefit everyone needing justice
by fatdad » Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:10 pm
by MoapaPk » Tue Jun 14, 2011 12:29 am
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests