Comments on: One reaction to the Supreme Court’s Barrett v. Jones, Funderburg decision yesterday http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/ A blog from the hills in North Mississippi Mon, 22 Mar 2010 04:13:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Anderson http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12883 Anderson Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:51:27 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12883 Like I said, I don't know p'ship law, but it seems inequitable for there to be no exceptions. Partners A and B want to buy some land from C who won't sell. B, unknown to A, holds C at gunpoint to make C sign a deed. Why is A equally liable for B's tort? Like I said, I don’t know p’ship law, but it seems inequitable for there to be no exceptions.

Partners A and B want to buy some land from C who won’t sell. B, unknown to A, holds C at gunpoint to make C sign a deed.

Why is A equally liable for B’s tort?

]]> By: Curly http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12882 Curly Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:29:38 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12882 I'm with Ben. These are the same rules that apply to everyone else, why should it be different for lawyers? Isn't that sort of thinking what got us here to begin with? I’m with Ben. These are the same rules that apply to everyone else, why should it be different for lawyers? Isn’t that sort of thinking what got us here to begin with?

]]> By: Robert http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12864 Robert Sun, 15 Nov 2009 14:09:07 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12864 Anderson, would that hostage,threat scenerio use the family & friends network supportive of state officials and politicians or would Dicky use his might to assign a special group to handle such matters. Just wondering Anderson, would that hostage,threat scenerio use the family & friends network supportive of state officials and politicians or would Dicky use his might to assign a special group to handle such matters. Just wondering

]]> By: mike greenberg http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12862 mike greenberg Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:44:04 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12862 BREAKING NEWS. New Federal Magistrate for the Southern District is Keith Ball. Judge Winston Kidd's name has been submitted for the Fifth Circuit. BREAKING NEWS. New Federal Magistrate for the Southern District is Keith Ball. Judge Winston Kidd’s name has been submitted for the Fifth Circuit.

]]> By: NMC http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12846 NMC Sat, 14 Nov 2009 03:17:50 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12846 Ben, it's cut and paste Ben, it’s cut and paste

]]> By: Underdog Soldier http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12845 Underdog Soldier Sat, 14 Nov 2009 03:04:12 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12845 "Scoreboard, scoreboard..." “Scoreboard, scoreboard…”

]]> By: poorboy http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12844 poorboy Sat, 14 Nov 2009 02:48:52 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12844 Good grief Grady. That's the longest sentence I've ever seen. Good grief Grady. That’s the longest sentence I’ve ever seen.

]]> By: Ben http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12843 Ben Sat, 14 Nov 2009 02:12:18 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12843 I say their liability is joint and several. Simple tort negligence case. Two or more defendants ... let the defendants sort it out between/among themselves after the plaintiff has recovered his damages. Same as suing the surgeon, the anesthesiologist, the radiologist, and all the other usual suspects. I say their liability is joint and several. Simple tort negligence case. Two or more defendants … let the defendants sort it out between/among themselves after the plaintiff has recovered his damages. Same as suing the surgeon, the anesthesiologist, the radiologist, and all the other usual suspects.

]]> By: Tortfeasor http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12842 Tortfeasor Sat, 14 Nov 2009 00:42:16 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12842 Suppose two lawyers, A and B, form a joint venture to represent a victim of a car crash. A is in charge of filing the complaint. For some reason, there are no "red flags", A blows the statute. The client sues A and B. B argues that blowing the statute was certainly not something that was contemplated when he and A entered into the joint venture, and that A's negligent conduct is outside the scope of the joint venture. In sum, B argues that A is the only possible defendant. What's the ruling and why? Suppose two lawyers, A and B, form a joint venture to represent a victim of a car crash. A is in charge of filing the complaint. For some reason, there are no “red flags”, A blows the statute. The client sues A and B. B argues that blowing the statute was certainly not something that was contemplated when he and A entered into the joint venture, and that A’s negligent conduct is outside the scope of the joint venture. In sum, B argues that A is the only possible defendant.
What’s the ruling and why?

]]> By: Ben http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/11/13/one-reaction-to-the-supreme-courts-barrett-v-jones-funderburg-decision-yesterday/comment-page-1/#comment-12840 Ben Sat, 14 Nov 2009 00:03:33 +0000 http://nmisscommentor.com/?p=3886#comment-12840 Izzat a 100% perfect copy of Mr. Tollison's statement? It doesn't scan smoothly, and multiple uses of "not" in the same sentence are like mountain road switchbacks. But I think I follow what he's saying. Or not. He musta dictated that letter and signed it without reading it. Izzat a 100% perfect copy of Mr. Tollison’s statement? It doesn’t scan smoothly, and multiple uses of “not” in the same sentence are like mountain road switchbacks. But I think I follow what he’s saying. Or not. He musta dictated that letter and signed it without reading it.

]]>