Posted on 01/18/2007 10:47:09 AM PST by GoldCountryRedneck
I used to be a commercial litigation attorney. Now I'm transactional. I'm not saying they won't look at the language. But I don't think they are just going to apply it without considering the policy, and the facts. I suspect they will be looking for reasons to throw it out without doing too much damage to the law.
Watch it on HDTV and I don't think you will think them so great... ;)
Clearly, if I'm the plaintiff I'm arguing policy, and if I'm the defendant I'm arguing strict interpretation of the language (unless their ain't no language to interepret), and if I'm the judge I'm gonna see if I can push the case to settle. The case will probably go to MSJ and then to mediation. Only question is how much she gets.
What kind of laws would a liberal pass against abusing dihydrogen monoxide?
That the rationale as to why drivers of autos where a passenger gets killed in an accident get charged if the driver is at fault? I'm really not an atty, just curious.
I'm of the school on this radio stunt that unfortunate accidents happen; lotta blame to go around but not of criminal or even civil recovery nature.
The radio DJ's can kiss their broadcasting careers goodbye as they live with the guilt.
Agreed.
According to one of the other posters, the DJs told a nurse who called in to tell them that it was dangerous, "We know, but we got releases. We're not responsible."
If you're a judge looking for a way to throw it out, the first question that comes to your mind is, "What did they know, and did they tell her everything they knew?"
If not, then the assumption of risk defense seems weaker.
Also, I wonder whether assumption of risk by this woman applies against her survivors. Probably so, I guess, since otherwise most of the ski resorts would be out of business.
The attorney for the plaintiff (father) will be on KFBK Sacramento - Tom Sullivans' talk show - shortly. I'll try to stay tuned and pass along whatever I'm able to get while I work.
All I know about California law is that I can always find a case that says what I want it to say. Glad I don't practice there.
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Just how much of the "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity?
It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not.
This point is so crucial to the debate over global warming that how water vapor is or isn't factored into an analysis of Earth's greenhouse gases makes the difference between describing a significant human contribution to the greenhouse effect, or a negligible one.
Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many "facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.
I'm not an attoreny either. I googled that. lol
I agree with you - accidents happen. However, a business should understand the liabilities of asking people abuse their bodies and their bodily functions. There's a reason our bodies eliminate waste. Apparently one of them is to keep cells from blowing up like balloons.
Don't forget, she got tickets for that evening's Justin Timberlake's concert. The tickets were her consolation prize for accepting Second Place in the water contest.
In HDTV you can see the Japanese dude blow hot dog chunks out of his nose when he starts vomiting after the Nathan's contest at Coney Island. YUM!!!
Really? Maybe if ALL the contestants died, sure. Then we can say that Russian Roulette with a snubnose revolver is dangerous. But one person? Out of how many? Six?
Hyponatremia can kill and that is not a medical fact open to debate any more than the fact that playing Russian Roulette can kill even if five times out of six it won't.
Extremely simple high school chemistry question:
You have a certain concentration of sodium in a 110 pound volume of saline fluid (a certain human body) and the same concentration of sodium in a 170 pound volume of saline fluid (another human body). You then add two gallons of free water to the first container and two gallons and five ounces of free water to the second container.
Which container will end up with the most diluted sodium concentration?
Which container will end up with the most diluted sodium concentration?"
A witch!
Does this mean that the sponsors of the hot dog eating contests and all of the other "stuff your face" contests are gonna have to stop their promotions? People can die from overeating too you know.
While I do have sympathy for the family who lost their loved one, where do you draw the line on this? If the contest isn't illegal, and if people chose to participate on their own free will, then why should criminal charges be considered, or a civil suit for that matter? I know the family is gonna win big bucks, but should they???
Flame away if you wish but I'm just wondering about it all.
***I want to know who that is on the left.***
He could be 10. They make them big these days.
A heckuva lot bigger than I made mine;)
You think that's a he? Is he wearing lipstick? (I can't tell.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.