Excuse me, I didn't realize a possible test in court is not allowed. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Max Hardberger" <mhardber...@admiraltyassociates.com> To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:19 PM Subject: Re: KR>Rand/Robinson Engineering--Assumption of Liability
> "de facto"? "having in reality assumed that role"? "ergo upon test in > court"? > > This is gibberish. Without having to go into the legal underpinnings of the > matter, the new supplier (under the conditions listed in my last post) has > no duty to previous builders and therefore no liability. Ergo he keeps his > shirt. > > Max Hardberger > Admitted in California Only > > > > It is assumed, for previous builders, the new owner will be the primary > > contact > > for support and new supplier defacto(having in reality assumed that role) > > ergo upon test in > > court has the very real possibility of losing his shirt. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "joe" <feg...@earthlink.net> > > To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:44 PM > > Subject: Re: KR>Rand/Robinson Engineering--Assumption of Liability > > > > > > > > _______________________________________ > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html
