Re: Brain Trauma Injury

More | Report Post

gLooks like somebody got into the Christmas egg nog a little early.
Mamadoc, if you'll step to the line to your left, Brandy or Charity or
whatever will be giving out some brie to go with the egg nog.

On 12/22/05, mamadoc wrote:
> DontHurtMe, I will try not not hurt you.
>
> I was answering as if it was a Bar question. I assert that, as Bar
> questions go, there are sufficient facts to RAISE THE ISSUES that I
> have raised. The idea of a Bar question is that they give you enough
> facts to reasonably raise an issue, and then you have to assert what
> additional facts would be needed to prove the elements and to
> successfully defend.
>
> Here, the facts included "years" of use of Farmer's land by potential
> adverse possessors. If this does not raise the issue of adverse
> possession or prescriptive easement for discussion, what would?
>
> Here, the facts included Farmer's transporting crates (an activity)
and
> placing them in a particular place that blocked a trail frequented for
> years by snowmobiling trespassers. If this does not impose on farmer
> the duties of a landowner, who is conducting activities, to known
> trespassers, what would?
>
> Here, Farmer took the time and effort to transport the crates to a
> particular place which would block the snowmobilers' path, and did not
> make the relatively minimal effort to warn the snowmobilers that the
> crates would be blocking their path. If this does not show intent to
> commit at least some bodily harm, what would? And, given that the
path
> was used not for strolling, or running, or sledding, but for
> snowmobiling, if this does not show intent to commit severe bodily
harm
> (or at least reckless disregard for the risk of such harm), what would?
>
> What law school do YOU go to?