“it was an accident due to a risk [the parents] were aware of.”
******************

Do you have a second job as a “salt rubber”? The law requires that, to deny recovery, the assumed risks being knowingly and intelligently made by the person bringing the claim. Did the child who suffered the harm know? Do you think these parents were aware of the information that Patty C revealed above? I wasn’t and I handle tort cases for a living. Also, do you think the child’s estate (in the person of his siblings and other beneficiaries who may not be his parents though they certainly are two) is owed nothing, regardless of the parents’ supposed negligence? By that I mean, if two or more people act negligently to cause or contribute to the death of another, should all go free because some were the parents, and they, in your view, played some role? How about if the parent was driving the family vehicle 5 miles over the limit on New Years Eve, and they were hit by a drunk driver? Should the child’s estate be denied recovery because the parent knew the risk that some drunk might be out on the road that night and contributed to the accident by negligently exceeding the speed limit?

I hope you meant no insult to this family, and I know you were using your “common sense,” but as we so often see, a common sense analysis is the most fundamental, and fails to consider all rights that the law considers important.

http://jonathanturley.org/2008/05/14/epa-issues-fart-chart-bovine-flatulence-measured-state-by-state/

We always knew your thinking was backward, but “telbin”?

People that have been following the career of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann are fully aware that it’s only a matter of time before he has a professional meltdown forcing him to once again change jobs.

Such was the case in 1997 when he abruptly left ESPN due to what he referred to in a Salon article five years later as having been unable to “handle the pressure of working in daily long-form television” while admitting that “deep down inside I’ve always believed that everybody around me was qualified and competent, and I wasn’t, and that some day I’d be found out.”

We believe it, too, Keith.

With this in mind, according to Monday’s New York Post, history is about to repeat itself

attorneys gotta eat too.

The quote at the bottom from a former Louisville Slugger bat designer is telling…

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/245505

…”Studies in the American Sports Medicine Journal indicate a pitcher’s ability to react to a ball hit from 60 feet, 6 1/2 inches away (the major league regulation distance) stops after 155 km/h. A 2002 report for the Journal for the American College of Sports Medicine found 37 per cent of balls hit by an aluminum bat reached 160 km/h, while just 2 per cent hit with a wooden bat did.

And Domalewski, like Green, was pitching from just 45 feet away.

Stephen Keener, president and CEO of Little League, recently told USA Today that the elimination of metal bats would lead to a “dramatic decline” in enrollment at the lower levels of the game.

“Non-wood bats spread the weight (of the ball) out across the bat,” Keener said. “It’s easier to handle, to swing and, for a lot of kids, to have a greater success playing the game.”

Since the introduction of the metal bat in 1971, it has been remodeled many times to improve performance. The steady push to make bats more powerful prompted Jack MacKay to quit his job as a metal bat designer for Louisville Slugger in 1989.

“This is the kind of technology you ought to be throwing at bin Laden, not some baseball pitcher,” MacKay told The Sporting News in 2002. “We’ve over-engineered it. It’s the worst thing I ever did. Aluminum bats and wood bats are not even in the same ballpark”. “