7 ms·
You're not coming across as the aggrieved party here. Kid, curiosity, no harm, etc. Would a ride home in a police car have done the trick maybe ? It sounds l
by danw1979 5y ago
You're not coming across as the aggrieved party here. Kid, curiosity, no harm, etc. Would a ride home in a police car have done the trick maybe ?
It sounds like you're abdicating responsibility for your decision to the lawyer. You must realise your lawyer can't represent you on a legal matter without your consent ?
- tibu 5y agoNo harm that time. But if it does not gets noticed what happens next time? He takes his friends? Or gets into another properly where he gets hurt? THe more disturbing is that such a matter can cost your school and scholarship. That's not the lawyers or the posters fault.
- BJBBB 5y agoPlease read again. You do not understand the risks where one does not pro-actively protect one self. Please note 'attractive nuisance' and 'calculus of negligence'. For a claimant's lawyer to be successful in California; that is, a settlement without going to trial, all they have to do is file a tort based on one or both of these two. Based on on my insurance agent and my legal counsel, I had no choice to pursue the criminal prosecutorial path or my lawyer and insurance carrier would be legally allowed to walk away from me. So I chose my family's livelihood over the kid. Your analysis was shallow and has no bearing on the legal reality of my world. If that is not how your world works, than good for you.