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 (50850)	6/13/2002 3:56:44 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 82486

One more strike, and you will be out, contract law- wise.....

To: Neocon who wrote (50850)	6/13/2002 4:17:24 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I disagree with that web site, then. The index to Corbin, who is the acknowledged expert on contract law, includes reasonable expectation, reasonable price, reasonable satisfaction, reasonable time, but not reasonable person. See, instead, Prosser and Keaton on Torts, the basic authority on torts, Fifth edition, Section 32. The Reasonable Person. The reasonable person standard is a negligence standard. It applies to tort law. Black's Law Dictionary, the gold standard of legal dictionaries: "Reasonable man doctrine or standard. The standard which one must observe to avoid liability for negligence is the standard of the reasonable man under all circumstances, including the foreseeability of harm to one such as the plaintiff." That's the complete defintiion. Negligence is a tort, not a contract, doctrine. Your site may be trying to simplify the law, but it's just plain getting it wrong.