- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 5/26/15 at 2:08 pm to Artie Rome
quote:The defense is not intended to claim contrib on the part of the one year old. It's intended to claim contrib on the part of the other plaintiffs, adults, who were present at the time of the raid.
Again, I get it. But...to claim contributory negligence by a one year old?
Should the defense have excluded the baby from a contrib affirmative defense paragraph? Technically yes, the baby was not negligent, BUT technically no, defense counsel doesn't have to exclude specific plaintiffs from affirmative defenses for notice pleading.
Posted on 5/26/15 at 4:39 pm to Artie Rome
quote:
Again, I get it. But...to claim contributory negligence by a one year old?
Did you even read the defense? The defense specifically said "Plaintiffs," which be a catchall to include the parents of the minor bringing suit. It did not say, the "minor plaintiff's actions.....," C'mon man.
This post was edited on 5/26/15 at 4:43 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News