|
You be the jury | by SnappingTurtle | 2007-02-16 08:15:20 |
|
Not Their Problem. Legally. | by Havoc | 2007-02-16 08:18:56 |
| It's not for selling $recalled_food, |
by hadji |
2007-02-16 08:30:50 |
it's for failing to notify customers when $recalled_food is recalled. It's not about being responsible for the content of the peanut butter, it's about being responsible with the information they track. If they did not track customer information, they would have no way of knowing who bought $recalled_food, and would therefore have no liability.
As they do track customer information, though, I would hold them accountable for it if I were on the jury. IANAL, but the charge of criminal negligence would seem to apply. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
I disagree, potentially, | by jeff_uk | 2007-02-16 08:34:43 |
|
2 days later doesn't matter. | by hadji | 2007-02-16 08:41:24 |
|
Would a newspaper announcement | by Peace_man | 2007-02-16 08:47:02 |
|
What it comes down to for me is that | by hadji | 2007-02-16 08:53:31 |
|
What if you know 100,000 people. | by Jeff_UK | 2007-02-16 08:59:03 |
|
If it was part of my business model that I tracked | by hadji | 2007-02-16 09:16:33 |
|
If that's the case, how effective would your | by Peace_man | 2007-02-16 09:28:07 |
|
If I sent the notification, I've fulfilled my | by hadji | 2007-02-16 09:33:19 |
|
You said it! | by Peace_man | 2007-02-16 10:06:42 |
|
I am not introducing the ability | by hadji | 2007-02-16 11:12:30 |
|
And promptly go bankrupt for paying | by jayfarm | 2007-02-16 11:05:43 |
|
In a case like that, where death or injury are | by Peace_man | 2007-02-16 09:04:33 |
|
I guess the question is how certain death is | by Peace_man | 2007-02-16 08:40:58 |
|
I would say that some effort is always warranted. | by hadji | 2007-02-16 08:44:09 |
