221967 Bullies, 3935 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 21 to 30 of 38
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 123 4 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. webprofessor is offline

    I am a moocher who cheats Bullshido out of much needed funds.

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    84

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 11:30am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: crappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel Browning
    In the mean time webprofessor you will undoubtedly get some freebies, but if you ever truly need someone to represent you, please do not return to the lawyer you got free legal advice from, because they will want a retainer this time. That trick works once and then we decide that you're a time waster.
    - I have someone on retainer now.
    - Time wasters & getting freebies are a part of business. Same thing happens to me in web development.
    Last edited by webprofessor; 3/13/2008 11:32am at .
  2. webprofessor is offline

    I am a moocher who cheats Bullshido out of much needed funds.

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    84

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 11:31am

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: crappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel Browning
    I'm also sending a link to this thread to all the other lawyers on this site, so you can't get any freebies here. :)
    oh noes *! please don't do that... anything but that!! lol..
  3. Incorrigible 1 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    108

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 11:31am


     Style: Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    ROTF. Is it Fake, no **** man! People need to slow down on assuming this is an inquiry into legal specifics and not just a topic for discussion.

    I thought this would spark a little thinking, opinion, and discussion because, well ****, it's interesting and it could happen at any dojo.

    Seeing as how I asked, "What are your thoughts on the following situations? What do you think the outcome would be in each situation should someone try to sue an instructor?"

    If someone with a legal background, such as Samuel Browning, chimed in, then hey I scored in the bonus round by peaking his interest.
  4. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,743

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 11:39am

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    It drives me nuts sometimes how people react. I like the legal topics, Sam and others have provided good advice, warnings, stories, etc etc etc.
  5. FickleFingerOfFate is offline
    FickleFingerOfFate's Avatar

    Guess which finger is the fickle one...

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Up in your grill.
    Posts
    5,645

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 11:44am

    supporting member
     Style: Karate/ Arnis

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    We shouldn't talk about legal issues on the public webz,

    the I.T. guy said so.
    If you can't laugh at yourself,
    Others will be happy to do it for you. :evil6:

    The 2 most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.


  6. Incorrigible 1 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    108

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 11:51am


     Style: Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel Browning
    The reason why I asked is that normally a lawyer would have to assert that the original sensei had some sort of supervisory relationship and then was negligent in such duties.

    So without wasting my time looking up the caselaw, I'm wondering if this is closer to some sort of product liability claim, especially to stretch out the statute of limitations. Lets suppose for the sake of argument the first sensi was negligent and he taught the technique 5 years ago and the limit for negligence in that state is 2 years. You need a theory to get around this problem and continuing supervision is the most likely theory.

    In the mean time webprofessor you will undoubtedly get some freebies, but if you ever truly need someone to represent you, please do not return to the lawyer you got free legal advice from, because they will want a retainer this time. That trick works once and then we decide that you're a time waster.
    So Sam, in theory if a plantiff/student can prove a supervisory relationship between the instructor (instructor A) at the place where the plantiff trains and instructor A's teacher (instructor B), then potentially instructor B can be held liable.

    I'm not sure what the burden of proof would be in establishing that, but WOW! With the way so many Martial Arts organizations run their affiliating process and requirements, doesn't that open up these organizations to a whole lot of potential liability?

    I mean say the Gracies' were/are(?) "certifying" instructors and have requirements for maintaining certification, so these instructors can specifically state they teach Gracie Jujitsu. Then doesn't this open the Gracies up to a potential supervising relationship and the liability that goes with it?

    *Note - I'm not saying the Gracies do things this way. I honestly do not know and I was only using the name as a point of reference.*
    (Just in case someone was getting ready to nit-pick on how the Gracies "really" do it...)
    Last edited by Incorrigible 1; 3/13/2008 11:59am at . Reason: People are thick?
  7. Sam Browning is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    9,845

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 12:07pm

    hall of famestaff
     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    "So Sam, in theory if a plantiff/student can prove a supervisory relationship between the instructor (instructor A) at the place where the plantiff trains and instructor A's teacher (instructor B), then potentially instructor B can be held liable.

    I'm not sure what the burden of proof would be in establishing that, but WOW! With the way so many Martial Arts organizations run their affiliating process and requirements, doesn't that open up these organizations to a whole lot of potential liability?"

    The burden of proof in a civil trial would be proof by a preponderance of the evidence, or anything over 50%. And yes an ongoing supervisory relationship could open you up for liability if this other instructor was your employee or agent. I supose that your counter argument would be that they were an independant contractor which still would not erase your liability for their actions, just make it harder to prove.
  8. Incorrigible 1 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    108

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 12:22pm


     Style: Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I gotta say that I thought this type of situation was truly and roundly fucked.

    I mean I do understand the liability if I were an instructor and a student opened up a branch dojo in my name or my school's name.

    However, if one of my hypothetical students went off to start their own school and I could still be, to some degree, liable... providing a "supervisory" relationship could be proved. It somewhat depends on how "supervisory" is defined, but in a civil trial where a jury is deciding.... Christ, that's scary.

    I mean what if this hypothetical student of mine came back to visit and train on a regular basis. It's not hard for me to imagine a lawyer arguing this establishes some sort of "supervisory" relationship because he is titularly still a student of mine... or is that completely off base?
  9. Sam Browning is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    9,845

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 1:45pm

    hall of famestaff
     

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You could argue that since he was not sending you money, and promoting people without your permission, that you were not truly supervising him in what we would consider a business sense.
  10. Incorrigible 1 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    108

    Posted On:
    3/13/2008 2:53pm


     Style: Aikido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I think I'm just in awe of the mere existing possibility of this type of suit and that it might have a chance to succeed, even in the event of the complete business separation scenario.

    Of course, I realize people start seemingly ridiculous suits and suits that press the bounds of belief every day, but this one has just left me in awe.... and it isn't even that much of a stretch when compared to the "McDonald's coffee burns" lawsuit a few years ago.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 123 4 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.