LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 131
0 members and 131 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 01-15-2004, 04:59 PM   #1667
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
I assume the NYC FBers are the exception to the rule

Quote:
Originally posted by ltl/fb
People worry more about implausible hypothetical situations after they get burned because the reps and warranties they put in a deal didn't cover something and they lost a ton of money.

But you big cats just keep going without sweating the small stuff. I like reading the cases that result.
No deal or settlement has ever been without a certain degree of risk. You cut the risk as much as you can, but it can naver be eliminated. For the cost of a complaint and a filing fee, any good lawyer can create miles of risk where the very finest agreement you could ever imagine seemed more impervious than the Hoover Dam.

I think you and I have different definitions of "implausible" and "relevant contingencies." BTW, there is no failsafe against a malpractice action. Law's a minefield. How many hundreds of baseless malpractice suits are filed every year where the claimant was basically just throwing a complaint at the wall to try to recoup a few bucks?
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:34 PM.