Re: "Obvious" warnings - drawing the line

Subject: Re: "Obvious" warnings - drawing the line
From: letoured -at- together -dot- net
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 12:38:44 -0400

In <3D513F7E -dot- B65F0D53 -at- optonline -dot- net>, on 08/07/02
at 11:40 AM, Peter <pnewman1 -at- optonline -dot- net> said:

>letoured -at- together -dot- net wrote:
>> That would come under the doctrine of comparative negligence... So the URL on
>> the lawsuit where the worker was successful is what?

>Not even close to comparative negligence.

Okay I'll bite; You said the worker removed the safety devices. How is that he
is not at least partially negligent and responsible for causing his own

letoured -at- together -dot- net

Want to support TECHWR-L? Get shirts, bags, hats, clocks,
and more from the TECHWR-L Store. All proceeds support TECHWR-L.

Save up to 50% with RoboHelp Deluxe. Get 2 great products for 1 low price!
You'll get RoboHelp Office PLUS RoboDemo, the software demonstration tool
that everyone's been talking about. Check it out and save!

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Re: "Obvious" warnings - drawing the line: From: Peter

Previous by Author: RE: About proprietary writing samples
Next by Author: Re: "Obvious" warnings - drawing the line
Previous by Thread: Re: "Obvious" warnings - drawing the line
Next by Thread: RE: "Obvious" warnings - drawing the line

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads