The Temple Bar.... drink up

[Sicy]

she is?

We're going to be naughty up here in the Bay Area for a weekend

 

[Lila64]

what?

i can't hear you over all the liberty!!!

or is it truthiness

*goes back to lurking*

 

[redkat]

We're going to be naughty up here in the Bay Area for a weekend

:jealous:

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

We're going to be naughty up here in the Bay Area for a weekend

*how can I get over to the Bay Area this next weekend*

 

[Sicy]

Drive

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

Oh, that's the least of my worries...it's getting out of the house to go to the Bay Area again!!!

I would love to see the two of you though...

 

[Sicy]

Maybe Redrocks can give you some pointers....

 

[redkat]

 

[greeneyedgirl]

*crawls into the bar*


Somebody make me a strong one

 

[redkat]

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

 

[redkat]

I'm 6 pages into my paper and I've only answered 3 of the 22 questions

 

[UberBeaver]

Gimme a question. I'll answer one.

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

I'm 6 pages into my paper and I've only answered 3 of the 22 questions

That's pretty good!!


Oh wait...no it isn't

 

[redkat]

Gimme a question. I'll answer one.

based on [Thing vs. Chusa] give the elements,damages, possible defenses to and a made up scenario of Negligent Infliction of Emotional distress. Explain both sides of the case based on your made up scenario.

thanks for the help

 

[UberBeaver]

based on [Thing vs. Chusa] give the elements,damages, possible defenses to and a made up scenario of Negligent Infliction of Emotional distress. Explain both sides of the case based on your made up scenario.

thanks for the help

OK. What are the choices?

 

[the rockin edge]

 

[UberBeaver]

I think it's False. I'm 97% sure it's false.

 

[Lila64]

would you like to use a lifeline

 

[redkat]

OK. What are the choices?

Beav I think you're rght. I'm gonna abbreviate so not to waste paper and just put F by #4

Someone that I allow to come into my home that I just realized is using my computer. Has been doing things on my comp that freak me out. I just checked the history and

 

[the rockin edge]

 

[UberBeaver]

OK, The Thing vs la Chusa basically states that 1. You have to have a close relationship to the victim.
2. You have to be there, at the scene of the crime.
3. You have to be distressed because of what you just witnessed.

So say you're walking near a construction site, and then The Thing gets all pissy on top of the construction site, cause really now, he's an asshole. So the reverberations cause some materials to fall. Now, let's say they hit your grandmother, but not you, right? Is it fair that only grandma gets compensated? According to The Thing vs La Chusa, no. Both of you get a payday. For real. That's awesome.

As for The Things defense? He's going to use the whole "I'm a super hero, saving the world, it was clobbering time" spiel, no doubt, but he'll have very little to counter an argument charging him with causing you emotional distress. He could use the whole, "weak willed woman" approach and then point to his own freakish nature and how he never had to ask for money, but I think Johns vs Smyth would shoot that down.

 

[greeneyedgirl]

*GG finds UberBeaver unbelievebly intoxicating*

 

[redkat]

OK, The Thing vs la Chusa basically states that 1. You have to have a close relationship to the victim.
2. You have to be there, at the scene of the crime.
3. You have to be distressed because of what you just witnessed.

So say you're walking near a construction site, and then The Thing gets all pissy on top of the construction site, cause really now, he's an asshole. So the reverberations cause some materials to fall. Now, let's say they hit your grandmother, but not you, right? Is it fair that only grandma gets compensated? According to The Thing vs La Chusa, no. Both of you get a payday. For real. That's awesome.

As for The Things defense? He's going to use the whole "I'm a super hero, saving the world, it was clobbering time" spiel, no doubt, but he'll have very little to counter an argument charging him with causing you emotional distress. He could use the whole, "weak willed woman" approach and then point to his own freakish nature and how he never had to ask for money, but I think Johns vs Smyth would shoot that down.

beav you've got it

 

[Reggie Thee Dog]

OK, The Thing vs la Chusa basically states that 1. You have to have a close relationship to the victim.
2. You have to be there, at the scene of the crime.
3. You have to be distressed because of what you just witnessed.

So say you're walking near a construction site, and then The Thing gets all pissy on top of the construction site, cause really now, he's an asshole. So the reverberations cause some materials to fall. Now, let's say they hit your grandmother, but not you, right? Is it fair that only grandma gets compensated? According to The Thing vs La Chusa, no. Both of you get a payday. For real. That's awesome.

As for The Things defense? He's going to use the whole "I'm a super hero, saving the world, it was clobbering time" spiel, no doubt, but he'll have very little to counter an argument charging him with causing you emotional distress. He could use the whole, "weak willed woman" approach and then point to his own freakish nature and how he never had to ask for money, but I think Johns vs Smyth would shoot that down.

Wow, that's impressive UB.

 

[redkat]

yep and I'm using that scenario

 

[~BrightestStar~]

Someone that I allow to come into my home that I just realized is using my computer. Has been doing things on my comp that freak me out. I just checked the history and

 

[redkat]

I've decided to take the passive agressive approach and instead of confronting her I'm gonna unplug my comp when she comes over

 

[the rockin edge]

 

[~BrightestStar~]

Good plan


So how are you?
Besides some paper you're writing about the Thing?

Can I get you a drink my dear?