Tuesday, May 02, 2006

standard negligence

I decided to post this after all because my brother is funny and I have no soul.

(posted with permission)

----- Original Message ----
From: brother
To: banjeroo
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 2:50:15 AM
Subject: this IS the best ever....

Hey roo,

This is the ... THE best website I have come across in a while.


so frickin funny. "Long pants" is one of my favourites.... especially the part about "daisy dukes"... Ha ha ha...

love b

----- Original Message ----
From: banjeroo
To: brother
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 5:27:16 AM
Subject: Re: this IS the best ever....

B, you are so funny, and soooooo 2003. You are talking to a person who has been attached through the umbilical cord of office jobs to the womb of the Internet for a LONG time. I have been watching Strong Bad since long before the lappy as an excellent way to avoid actual work. Did you check out Teen Girl Squad? Under "toons"? That is one of my favourites. Glad you finally found this website. Tell me that I at least told you about Strindberg and Helium too.... ?


----- Forwarded Message ----
From: brother
To: banjeroo
Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 12:44:16 PM
Subject: Re: this IS the best ever....

shouldn't have said that to a budding lawyer... now I might have to sue you for negligence for not telling me... (this is what I'm studying right now)

1. Duty of Care? Yes
* the brother sister relationship is a close one
* it was reasonably foreseeable that negligence on the part of sister could harm brother
* being an older sister comes with attendant obligations to younger siblings, particularly in what are close families. While it may not qualify as a fiduciary duty, it is close to such a relationship.

2. Breach of the duty? Yes
* sister failed to meet a basic standard of care by failing to notify brother of cool website.
* sister and brother communicate often, and often about "web" content.
* defendant may argue that a failure to act is not actionable; however, in light of the near fiduciary relationship it is not unreasonable to extend a degree of liability to sister for negligent omissions.

3.Harm suffered? Yes
*years of lost strong bad time, damage familial relations, psychological suffering, loss of dignity and self-worth.

4.Causation? Yes
* but for sister's failure to notify brother, the harm would not have been caused.

5. Damages too remote? No
* sister knew or ought to have known that this type of injury was reasonably foreseeable. Though she didn't have to foresee the specific chain of events or the specific consequences, she was aware that by failing to notify brother of cool website that he was put directly in harms way.

see you in court!

love b


Post a Comment

<< Home