But this time it was different.
Perhaps it was because just yesterday I had lunch with this very professor and two other classmates at a fancy diner, and therefore felt a slight but dwindling kinship with him. Or maybe it was the out-pouring of support via IM that exploded on my laptop screen as the first "Mr. Bramhall" emerged from the professor lips. Well, that was more distracting than anything. Whatever it was, my confidence soared and, dare I say it, I managed to respond to all of his hypotheticals with what seemed to me like sensible answers.
Specifically, he asked me about whether a guy driving a car, who throws his coffee out the window, thereby dousing a bystander on the sidewalk, should be held liable for the bee stings endurred by said bystander after he lifts his arms in indignation and stirs up a hidden bee-hive in the tree above his head. Not liable, I said, with as much conviction as I could muster at the mind-numbingly early hours of 11 am (that's my earliest class, so it is, by definition, early)! Of course we cannot find the poor sap liable - that outcome was an unforeseeable consequence of the careless act committed by the litterbug.
That is the honest-to-God truth of what he asked. He then followed it up by inserting a pit bull into the story, but at this time I was too busy replying to people on IM to notice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
i would have sued the city, who owned the tree, who didnt properly maintain the tree, and allowed a beehive full of dangerous bees be around people. ah, the american judicial system.
yay an update! man. liabilities. legal briefs. reminds me of envirnomental law. except your classes are much more intense seeing that you are in the #5 ranked law school in the nation. stop imming in class. update instead.
Post a Comment