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 (77485)	10/13/2003 2:46:30 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Neo, will you please quit picking at the example and just answer my question. Can you please assume that a contract was broken resulting in damages, that the individual who broke the contract would be ordinarily liable for damages, but that that individual claims freedom of conscience as the reason for breaking the contract. My question is to what extent that claim gets him off the hook? Can't we please just isolate a freedom of conscience claim from all the garbage and address what its marginal value is as a defense?

To: Neocon who wrote (77485)	10/13/2003 2:50:37 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

" ... discovering that the premise of the contract. Right. And so Mojo might be off the hook. But Leslie entered the contract in good faith and had some dependency on the promised services. She incurred damages when services were not delivered. The liability could even fall on the word of mouth person (a motel employee or the motel itself) who told the concierge to use mojo.