3 ms·
That’s actually a question for you. You won’t truly know if you’re allowed to until a court decides. You can choose to proceed and crush it, and then deal with
by nkrisc 2y ago
That’s actually a question for you. You won’t truly know if you’re allowed to until a court decides. You can choose to proceed and crush it, and then deal with the consequences of doing so if it turns out you were wrong. Likely you’ll end up owing damages to the owner of the car, perhaps even punitive damages on top.
I think the same applies here.
- hmmm-i-wonder 2y agoThe TRO actually means you aren't allowed, that's the point. It's an ordered injunction that legally obliges you from not acting until the courts can review the facts. The court IS deciding, temporarily.
- nkrisc 2y agoIn this case, yes. That’s pretty cut and dry for the time being. However regarding the analogy I was replying to, I was pointing out that it’s less a situation of what you’re allowed to do and more one of what you believe you’re allowed to do, and weighing the consequences of being wrong against upholding your stated terms. In other words, something you should probably discuss with a lawyer.
- account42 2y agoThere is no TRO in the car park analogy.
- hmmm-i-wonder 2y agoBut there is here, so its a flawed analogy.