3 ms·
Oh, that’s exactly what there is: a duty to follow the law insofar as that law was made with the intent of protecting the plaintiff if the plaintiff was injured
by singleshot_ 3y ago
Oh, that’s exactly what there is: a duty to follow the law insofar as that law was made with the intent of protecting the plaintiff if the plaintiff was injured in that manner in which the law intended he be protected against.
There is no reason that the absence of a penalty under the statute would immunize everyone violating it from per se negligence, unless I’m missing something foundational here.
- qingcharles 3y agoI'm not great on tort law. IANAL. But let's say the law says "The court clerk shall issue all requested documents within 7 days", and the clerk takes 11 months to get you the documents and due to their tardiness you lost your job, wife, children, residency, whatever. I'm not feeling that you could sue, in Illinois at least. Sure, the law said they "shall" do it, but it's directory, not mandatory. It just looks like it is mandatory. I know 100% you cannot prosecute a government official for Official Misconduct[0] in Illinois for violating a law that says they "shall" do something unless it also has an associated punishment for the specific statute they violated. [0] (720 ILCS 5/33-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 33-3) Sec. 33-3. Official misconduct. (a) A public officer or employee or special government agent commits misconduct when, in his official capacity or capacity as a special government agent, he or she commits any of the following acts: (1) Intentionally or recklessly fails to perform any mandatory duty as required by law;
- singleshot_ 3y agoWe are approaching a level of depth in this conversation that is probably not appropriate for a non-lawyer and one who does not practice in Illinois. One thing I can say is that the statutory text you have pasted talks about misconduct but it says absolutely nothing about negligence.