Law Vibe

From Lawyers Garden:

On the reasonably prudent child during the bar:

Children under 4 have no duty of care at all. We basically consider children under 4 to be protoplasmic orbs of destruction. They can electrocute the fish, put the cat in the blender, whatever. It’s “cute.”

On Borrowing Statutes in Civil Liability:

So to satisfy the two part test, the plaintiff must show that she is a member of the class of persons that the statute seeks to protect and that injury is in the class of risks that this statute seeks to prevent. So let’s take a tort case for property damage that involves a defendant who was smoking marijuana. Can you borrow the marijuana statutes against the defendant to establish liability? Well, what is the injury that anti-marijuana statutes intends to protect people from?
(silence)
….yeah. I thought so too. Perhaps an anti-munchies agenda?
(more silence)
Let’s just say it’s not property damage and move on, shall we?