Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- From: Fred the Red Shirt <fredfighter@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:15:56 -0700
On Sep 4, 7:13 pm, Jakofalltra...@xxxxxxxxx (J T) wrote:
Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 1:11pm (EDT-3) fredfigh...@xxxxxxxxxxx
(Fred the Red Shirt) doth sayeth:
<snip> FWIW, my understanding is that a tresspasser may sue for injuries
suffered due to an unsafe condition on the property if a person legally
on the property would have been subject to the same risk. <snip>
Sounds like lawyer and politician weasel wording. Far as I'm
concerned, someone legally on the property would not be subject to the
same risk, if for no other reason than because being on the property
legally, he/she would (or should) be aware of the risk(s).
It sounds like you are presuming the property owner would
appraise the individual of any hazards. In general it is entirely
possible for people to legally be on the property without the
knowledge of the property owner. Obvious examples include
police and firemen.
A city used a similar argument when a drunk sued after falling
down an open manhole. In his ruling the judge observed that
"An inebriated man has as much a right to a safe street on
which to walk as a sober man, and far greater need."
--
FF
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- From: Just Wondering
- Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- References:
- Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- From: Fred the Red Shirt
- Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- From: J T
- Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- Prev by Date: Re: What kinds of plywood do you usually use ? What end use do you use plywood for ?
- Next by Date: Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- Previous by thread: Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- Next by thread: Re: OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
