4 ms·
That is textbook fraud. Courts consider intent, you cant just rules lawyer them with an argument that "it didnt technically say my public charger had to be acce
by ac29 2y ago
That is textbook fraud. Courts consider intent, you cant just rules lawyer them with an argument that "it didnt technically say my public charger had to be accessible to the public".
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Sohcahtoa82 2y agoDepends on the lawyer, judge, and possibly jury. We've definitely seen cases where intent of a law was clear, but the ruling was made according to the letter of the law. It's basically why Legalese exists. They have to try to cover every possible corner case and explicitly spell things out as much as possible to avoid loopholes that can be created by creative interpretations of the letter.