Legal Muse

Insert witty tagline here…

Posts Tagged ‘Over-Rule


with 3 comments

Prof: Now, the dissent cites Ohio v. Wyandotte Chemical Corp to refute the opinion’s stream of commerce argument. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? In that case they found that since the Corp dumped chemicals in the water of a river, and had knowledge that it would be propagated by that river, they should be held liable in the areas it affected downstream. Doesn’t that support the arguement that World Wide Volkswagon should be held accountable for the car that drove to Ohio and exploded in the crash?

Over-Rule: Well, no.

Prof: Why?

Over-Rule: Well… (pause) you wouldn’t expect to put a boat on the Ohio River and expect it to end up on the Nile, and be held liable for it, just like you wouldn’t expect to sell a car in New York and expect it to get in an accident in Miami on 95 and be held liable.

*silence at how awesome the point was*

Bill: *Starts chuckling because he JUST picked up on the “stream of commerce” pun.*

Taken from last Friday’s fun:

In this pic is Sam, Over-Rule behind her, and Veto in the corner, apparently flexing.


Written by DMN

September 4, 2008 at 12:28 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , ,