Civil Liability Puns

I hope this question is allowed on this sub. We were told that Professional Liability Insurance has doubled in cost this year (with no explanation. It was implied that this is true throughout the industry.)

I'm looking into whether this is true or it's just what a particular carrier is telling me for some reason. If it's true, I'm wondering what the reason is.

As a result of the Great Molasses Flood... The City of Boston began to demand that all engineering plans and blueprints be filed and reviewed by professionals before permits would be issued. City inspectors would scrutinize every aspect of construction before allowing structures to be used. Zoning laws would separate dangerous industry from dense neighborhoods.

What began in Boston spread throughout the United States, including a new attitude that individuals and corporations should be held liable when negligence resulted in death.

https://www.shefflaw.com/how-the-boston-molasses-flood-began-a-new-era-of-liability/

I encounter many owners who want tenants to take a civil liability insurance(~3M). While it’s costs okish, has anyone used it and what did you claim it against? Thank you!

Look, I’m pro vaccine but I found it quite concerning to learn about Pfizer’s past fraud settlement case in 2009, which they were found guilty of defraud and/or misleading the public about a certain anti-inflammatory drug called Bextra. They had to pay $2.3b dollars as a part of the settlement, being one of the largest health criminal fines in the history of the world.

Not saying that this tarnishes their vaccine in any way (I’m still getting the jab to do my part), but I thought it was worth people knowing as I had no idea. If I was going to buy or use a product from a business, I would be keen to know their history and if they had one of the largest criminal fines against them in the history of the world.

Source: The United States Department of Justice https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history

Hi all Sgredditors,

I would like to know if I were to join a Civil Service job, do I still have to complete my 10years ORNS responsibility?

Thanks in advance!

I am working as a notary public in the state of Florida and have receive an official complaint from the state department of the notary public.

Apparently, I either:

1. Notarized a document in error while working at my employer
2. Notarized a document that was later altered after I had notarized it

The document in question came to light in an unrelated civil case in which the defendant (who was found guilty) forged the signature of his supervisor on a document that alleged that the plaintiff in the case attacked him at his job. The court record found that this workplace assault incident never occurred, and that the supervisor's signature on the document I notarized was forged.

My notary journal reflects that I verified the identity of the defendant in the case, however, evidently he either:

1. Signed the document I notarized as a person other than himself - this would be my error
2. Altered the document after I notarized it (e.g. he typed in or added the name of his supervisor under the signature line AFTER I notarized it) ... Or he executed some more sophisticated forgery

At this point, I am wondering how I should respond to the state and what position I should take. My wish list of outcomes is:

• I avoid criminal charges. I do not know the individual convicted of forgery, and if I did make a mistake, it was not done so intentionally.
• I limit (or eliminate) any civil liability on my end. I am early on in my career, make below median household income in my state, and do not have any assets to "survive" a civil case short of declaring bankruptcy (in the event that the plaintiff in the above civil case decides to pursue damages from me)
• I do not mind relinquishing my notary license and/or changing jobs. I do not expect to keep my job. I have not yet told my employer, because I am planning on changing jobs prior to them learning of this incident to avoid any black marks on my resume.

Thanks for your help.

Context: this is not to do with me, it’s to do with a Reddit post I saw months ago in which someone intentionally put their room mate’s known allergen into the food of theirs that the roommate kept stealing, and it resulted in anaphylactic shock and hospitalisation.

Order!

I have received a message from the Member for Pearce, /u/NGSpy (SDP) to introduce a motion, namely the Motion Calling for Uniform Civil Liability Legislation as Private Member's Business and seconded by the Member for Nicholls, /u/model-kyosanto (GRN). The Motion is authored by GHagrid.

This House:

(1) Notes the massive discrepancies between each state’s civil liability legislation including but not limited to:

>(a) the extent of each acts applicability to the damages process;

>(b) specific exclusions of the applicability of the civil liability act, prompting the coverage of common law damages in:

>>(i) asbestos inhalation and dust related diseases;

>>(ii) intentional acts with intent to cause death or injury;

>>(iii) claims under motor accident legislation;

>>(iv) sexual assault or sexual misconduct;

>>(v) smoking or tobacco product claims;

>>(vi) claims under workplace accidents legislation;

>(c) access to common law damages in no-fault compensation schemes;

>(d) caps on the impairment of general common law damages;

>(e) thresholds of general common law damages;

>(f) caps on assessments of future economic loss;

>(g) caps on assessments of gratuitous services;

>(h) minimum reductions for contributory negligence assessments when a party is intoxicated;

(2) Acknowledges that these discrepancies are interfering with the inalienable right of equal access to justice.

(3) Comments that these discrepancies are contradictory to section 117 of the Constitution which prohibits discrimination on the basis of state residence.

(4) Comprehends that the discrepancies between states makes the law much more complex than it needs to be, having the effect of:

>(a) further limiting equal access to justice; and

>(b) Further increasing the cost of legal action.

(5) Understands that civil liability legislation is one of many areas where Federation is harming our nation.

(6) Proceeds with an inquiry into the many powers that should become Commonwealth powers under the constitution.

###Debate Required

The question being that the Motion be agreed to, debate shall now commence.

If a member wishes to move amendments, they are to do so by responding to the pinned comment in the thread below with a brief detail of the area of the amendments.

Debate shall end at 7PM 16/09/2021.

Now that Texas has set the precedent, Blue states should write and enact laws that enable private citizens to sue unvaccinated individuals for being unvaccinated. Also, enable private citizens to sue other private citizens for potentially illegal gun ownership or modification.

There's nothing stopping, say, California from passing a law that says you can be sued by anyone in the country if you are suspected of spreading COVID while unvaccinated, or having an illegal gun, ammunition, or modifications of any kind and that if they succeed in their civil case against you, you must pay them at least $10,000.

Oh, and you cannot counter sue for a frivolous lawsuit, even if you win. Oh, and you cannot recover your legal costs, even if you win.

If it's good for abortion in Texas, and SCOTUS refuses to act on it, why not take this same approach for other things?

I was driving last night in heavy traffic. I was in the second from the far left lane. My lane was moving much faster than the far left lane. A car changed lanes from that far left lane into my lane, apparently oblivious to the situation. This driver caused the car in front of me to swerve to avoid hitting him. That car swerved right, then over corrected back to the left, hit a concrete median and eventually drifted to a stop on the right shoulder facing the opposite direction of traffic. He hit at least one other car along the way. The driver who changed lanes and caused this chaos simply continued on as if nothing happened. Is that driver at fault civilly? Could they be charged criminally for leaving the scene?

Relevant Excerpt:

>Under the authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) or the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA),9 U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions, directly or indirectly, with individuals or entities (“persons”) on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List), other blocked persons, and those covered by comprehensive country or region embargoes (e.g., Cuba, the Crimea region of Ukraine, Iran, North Korea, and Syria). Additionally, any transaction that causes a violation under IEEPA, including transactions by a non-U.S. person which causes a U.S. person to violate any IEEPA-based sanctions, is also prohibited. U.S. persons, wherever located, are also generally prohibited from facilitating actions of non-U.S. persons, which could not be directly performed by U.S. persons due to U.S. sanctions regulations. OFAC may impose civil penalties for sanctions violations based on strict liability, meaning that a person subject to U.S. jurisdiction may be held civilly liable even if it did not know or have reason to know it was engaging in a transaction with a person that is prohibited under sanctions laws and regulations administered by OFAC.

Sauce Here: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/126/ofac_ransomware_advisory_10012020_1.pdf

OFAC Sanctions list here: https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/

Analysis: Both TWEA and IEEPA carries Criminal and Civil penalties, so under these acts they can fine the company, fine staff directly, or press criminal charges. We know the US Government as part of both the 5 eyes agreements and domestic bank monitoring programs under FACTA monitors all international wire transfers. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies generally leave a paper trail that can be traced back to who purchased the currency.

What I expect to start happening here is most CFO's are going to write off the cost of the ransom as a tax deduction which tips off the IRS that a ransom of some kind was paid. I e