Fun Legal Hypo (Prole Jew Messrs. Fix It Break Shit) - From Talmud Law Class
| Vivacious house | 11/06/17 | | Transparent french chef patrolman | 11/06/17 | | Vivacious house | 11/06/17 | | Soul-stirring Startled Church Building | 11/19/17 | | beady-eyed white corn cake giraffe | 11/06/17 | | Ruby sanctuary half-breed | 11/06/17 | | excitant hominid institution | 11/06/17 | | Vivacious house | 11/06/17 | | excitant hominid institution | 11/06/17 | | Vivacious house | 11/09/17 | | Thriller Prole Plaza | 11/10/17 | | Vivacious house | 11/19/17 | | olive irradiated persian | 11/19/17 | | Vivacious house | 11/19/17 | | olive irradiated persian | 11/19/17 | | olive irradiated persian | 11/19/17 | | Vivacious house | 11/19/17 | | bright stimulating rehab | 12/03/17 | | excitant hominid institution | 12/03/17 | | bright stimulating rehab | 12/17/17 | | Vivacious house | 01/05/18 | | bright stimulating rehab | 01/05/18 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 6th, 2017 12:15 PM Author: Vivacious house
moishe goes to sholmo's store and buys a dozen 2x4's to build his sukkah.
shlomo asks moishe if he wants them delivers. moishe declines, saying he'll load them on his car's roof rack.
moishe loads the poles himself, and then asks one of shlomo's workers to help secure them.
the 2x4's werent properly aligned on the roof rack so the worker helped adjust them so they could be properly secured. in the process, one of the 2x4's falls off the rack and cracks the car mirror.
discuss who may be liable to whom.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787186&forum_id=2#34616860) |
|
Date: November 6th, 2017 12:19 PM Author: beady-eyed white corn cake giraffe
only a FOB would write "wants them delivers" by mistake. lmao @ outing yourself ITT.
--
Date: November 6th, 2017 12:15 PM
Author: David Ben Gurion (*)
moishe goes to sholmo's store and buys a dozen 2x4's to build his sukkah.
shlomo asks moishe if he wants them delivers. moishe declines, saying he'll load them on his car's roof rack.
moishe loads the poles himself, and then asks one of shlomo's workers to help secure them.
the 2x4's werent properly aligned on the roof rack so the worker helped adjust them so they could be properly secured. in the process, one of the 2x4's falls off the rack and cracks the car mirror.
discuss who may be liable to whom.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787186&forum_id=2#34616880) |
Date: November 6th, 2017 12:20 PM Author: excitant hominid institution
Moishe waving away help then grabbing some worker prevented Schlomo from properly provisioning labor for damage-free delivery
waives protection?
EDIT:
he received the goods as he originally requested and in agreement with his wishes.
Asked for this one worker help- correcting an error made by Moishe and damage is done. Worker may not have been functioning in the capacity they were hired in and this charity effort was not how Moishe would properly contract for goods with protections.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787186&forum_id=2#34616887) |
Date: November 19th, 2017 12:36 AM Author: olive irradiated persian
Shlomo ought to have loaded the burden with Moishe.
He is liable for not having helped to load that burden, however Moishe refusing help means that I think no damages are in order.
The workers are liable for nothing.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787186&forum_id=2#34721420) |
|
Date: November 19th, 2017 1:23 AM Author: olive irradiated persian
Did Shlomo offer to help Moishe load the planks onto his car?
That's really the crux of the matter (Deut 22:4)
Shlomo's delivery could also theoretically be construed as an offer to unload the burden of Moishe. Moishe's refusal of these offers means he is not liable.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787186&forum_id=2#34721642) |
Date: January 5th, 2018 3:19 PM Author: Vivacious house
RULING:
there are three key questions:
1) whether the worker is a direct or indirect cause of the damage. if he's a direct cause of the damage, he's responsible for both negligent and non-negligent damage and even if it's a total accident. if he's an indirect cause of the damage, he's only responsible if he's negligent.
2) whether the worker is an agent of the store owner, or whether he volunteered his services to the other guy.
3) local custom with this sort of transaction
the ruling isnt really fleshed out beyond that. no answer was given. kinda gay
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3787186&forum_id=2#35088968) |
|
|