Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (50813)	6/13/2002 2:49:12 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

My point had to do with whether Laz understood himself to be accepting a legal obligation Doesn't matter. Whether he accepted a legal obligation is a matter of law, not of intent. If the facts to create a contract are there, a contract exists, whether or not one or both parties actually realized they were making a legally enforceable contract. As with your dry cleaner picker up. A friend of mine was actually consulted about a similar case. She discussed it with me at a bar function. A day care here charges $1.00 for each minute you pick up your child late . One parent asked another to pick up both their kids, because she knew she would have trouble getting there on time. The second parent agreed. Then she got her child, but forgot to pick up the other child. The second Mom didn't find out about this until she got home, about an hour later. She raced over, but was dinged with a bill in excess of $50. She consulted her friend, who was the lawyer, and the lawyer said yes, she had a suit against the forgetful parent They agreed to split the charge, but IMO the relying parent would probably have won the whole amount if she had taken the case to small claims court.