Thread: Smart Move

  1. #26
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    Believe what you want...pal. We've been through this before...I see them and speak to them as they often spend some time observing with my Battalion when in town. They are from all over your neck of the woods and there is plenty of research that can be found in old fire engineerings and WNYF's. They've been comming here for quite some time. You'd be very surprised at the genesis of many procedures and accepted practices out there. We've even had long standing relationships with the military and much of our procedures came from men with Military backgrounds.

    There is very little original thought out there...most are modifications or outright duplications of concepts that are most often driven by expereinces and necessity. Your USAR X is a modification off other ideas....I won't say where....

    I imagine there are some industrial engineers somewhere who were buffs who did a paper or two on this subject...any one out there?

    And we do the same...it isn't something to be embarased about...we sent firemen to London during the Blitz to learn what we could from them while the Krauts were laying waste to GB.

    FTM-PTB
    Hey Fred. Next, he'll be telling you that the initials FDNY actually originated in California.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  2. #27
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CALFFBOU View Post
    Bro- I believe you when you say you get a lot of visitors from here asking about how to do this and that.

    But USAR and building markings started here, from what I know. And NIMS is based on FireSCOPE and FS was based on the military.
    Go back and read all the articles about who uses NIMS and who doesn't...I'm not going to revisit it.

    Tell your yarns, but not everything fire service is based on XXNY. Some people have developed other tactics, strategies and ways from other sources.
    No I never said everything is based on us...much of it comes from East of Texas however....that is my point We've borrowed ideas from other cities as well. You either don't understand or don't want to understand that newer and less experienced cities got their inhabitants and many of their ideas from places where the transplants were from and brought with them ideas and procedures...and it is always much easier to use someone else's blueprint than to start from scratch.

    Side note- Dont you NY guys ever think that not everyone worships you? I mean damn, we had some FDNY guys come into my firehouse once to visit right after 9/11 and....lets just say I would not act that way when a guest in someone's house.
    A. Are you sure they were from here...heard and even ran into some imposters over the years. B. I don't know if anyone worships us nor do I care. I'm not sure where you got this idea in your head that we keep ourselves going based on some Hollywood facination complex.
    C. There are d*cks on my job...just the same there is at least one d*ck on your job!

    If you could just site some of your sources, I would love to see them.
    I just did that in a prior thread and you didn't even bother to take the time to read it, understand it and comprehend it before calling it a bunch of BS...so I have better things to do with my time. Research it yourself...I gave you two great places to look.

    FTM-PTB

  3. #28
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    My dept. is so progressive, we are right past being enthralled with all this "new" stuff and are back to using many "traditional" methods and a few "new" methods.

  4. #29
    Permanently Removed
    CALFFBOU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    A. Are you sure they were from here...heard and even ran into some imposters over the years. B. I don't know if anyone worships us nor do I care. I'm not sure where you got this idea in your head that we keep ourselves going based on some Hollywood facination complex.
    C. There are d*cks on my job...just the same there is at least one d*ck on your job!

    I just did that in a prior thread and you didn't even bother to take the time to read it, understand it and comprehend it before calling it a bunch of BS...so I have better things to do with my time. Research it yourself...I gave you two great places to look.

    FTM-PTB
    Yes, they were from there and the real thing. If you remember, a very rich man that owns PELCO camera business in Central CA flew hundreds of FDNY/NYPD members out to his house and gave the a major BBQ all on his dime. I was there and very humbled, it was on the national news. And these guys also came to my station and we took care of them. Lots of photos to prove the event

    Granted these visitors are a very smaller percentage of the agency represented. But I did not like the way these current members of the FDNY spoke or treated some of us. They were in our house but....I wonít comment any further.

    As for your sources, they were outdated department policies that didnít really related to the thread and subject matter at hand. If I am referring to the wrong thread, sorry, please re-direct me cuz I missed it then.

    As for the topic at hand- As for the whole marking of the house with the "X" thing, all I can do is respond to the comment directed at me and give an honest answer, we started doing it here sometime in the 60s or 70s after all of the earthquakes. I wouldnt call it "progressive", just an operational tactic.

    And FFFred, your attitude and demeanor simply supports and justifies my position. You seem to be upset I am not on the wagon train, not humping your leg like others here. Please give me something to work with than SCBA bite blocks, Rescue Me, the Bronx Bend and horse and hay lofts.

    Respectfully, Bou
    Last edited by CALFFBOU; 02-04-2009 at 04:05 PM.

  5. #30
    Permanently Removed
    CALFFBOU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nameless View Post
    My dept. is so progressive, we are right past being enthralled with all this "new" stuff and are back to using many "traditional" methods and a few "new" methods.
    Some wise person once told me- "Everyting in moderation" and "Use baby steps".

    Not everything new and progressive is the hot ticket. ie- Reflective vests over turnout coats.

  6. #31
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    We are so "progressive" that it isn't even progressive to call yourself progressive anymore. We've achieved such a high state of progressivicationess that we have been able to shed the mortal coil and remove all physical trappings such as PPE, apparatus, and hose. We're able to guarantee 100% success with nothing more then a notepad and, for the real tough jobs, a safety vest.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  7. #32
    Forum Member
    sfd1992's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Wa
    Posts
    407

    Default

    JHC.......again?

    Are some of you on a mission to see how many threads you can d--k up with the same old tired horsesh-t?

  8. #33
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CALFFBOU View Post
    Yes, they were from there and the real thing. If you remember, a very rich man that owns PELCO camera business in Central CA flew hundreds of FDNY/NYPD members out to his house and gave the a major BBQ all on his dime. I was there and very humbled, it was on the national news. And these guys also came to my station and we took care of them. Lots of photos to prove the event

    Granted these visitors are a very smaller percentage of the agency represented. But I did not like the way these current members of the FDNY spoke or treated some of us. They were in our house but....I wonít comment any further.
    I know what you refer to and I appologise... That is most certainly not representative of us.

    As for your sources, they were outdated department policies that didnít really related to the thread and subject matter at hand. If I am referring to the wrong thread, sorry, please re-direct me cuz I missed it then.
    I assure you they are most certainly up to date and current. If I had produced policies on "banking the coal furnance" or proper steam pressure to be maintained in the boiler...then yes, your view would be valid...however it is not.

    As for the whole marking of the house with the "X" thing, all I can do is respond to the comment directed at me and give an honest answer, we started doing it here sometime in the 60s or 70s after all of the earthquakes.
    Fair enough.

    And FFFred, your attitude and demeanor simply supports and justifies my position. You seem to be upset I am not on the wagon train, not humping your legs like everyone else. Please give me something to work with than SCBA bite blocks, Rescue Me, the Bronx Bend and horse and hay lofts.
    I could give a f*ck less if you are on the "wagon train" as you call it. No one humps my leg and most often those like yourself, mischaracterize our job, procedures and history with your dislike of anything developed or practiced before you waltzed in the front door of a firehouse. It should be clear...most have a strong distaste for us and what we do. I simply attempt to explain it and not allow ignorance to stain the pool of ideas and concepts being exchanged on these forums.

    Now I have to go take a mark in the journal!

    FTM-PTB

  9. #34
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canuck Expat May be anywhere
    Posts
    2,906

    Default

    Its funny how some peoples posts continue to support the old adage
    " If they were half as good as they claim they are, they would be twice as good as they actually are."

  10. #35
    Permanently Removed
    CALFFBOU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED View Post
    I know what you refer to and I appologise... That is most certainly not representative of us.


    I assure you they are most certainly up to date and current. If I had produced policies on "banking the coal furnance" or proper steam pressure to be maintained in the boiler...then yes, your view would be valid...however it is not.

    Fair enough.


    I could give a f*ck less if you are on the "wagon train" as you call it. No one humps my leg and most often those like yourself, mischaracterize our job, procedures and history with your dislike of anything developed or practiced before you waltzed in the front door of a firehouse. It should be clear...most have a strong distaste for us and what we do. I simply attempt to explain it and not allow ignorance to stain the pool of ideas and concepts being exchanged on these forums.

    Now I have to go take a mark in the journal!

    FTM-PTB
    No need to apologize. Again, a small few doesnít make up the whole agency.

    I am sure the SOPs there are up to date and current; they just didnít address my question at the time. No big deal.

    I know you donít care and it really doesnít matter. As for the fire service as a whole; again, I respect and practice tradition. What works there, works fine and like most anything can be improved. If it wasnít for all of us here progressing to a computer- you wouldnít be reading this message.

    I have never told anyone here they have to accept my opinions, ways or be progressive. I just state and share my experiences and education. I donít want NY shoved down my neck like you donít want CA shoved down yours. I just get tired of people telling me I have to be like New York and act like Rescue Me.. I do? Why? Because tradition? Why?

    And I do NOT have a strong disstate for you or the FDNY. In fact, I have major respect for ALL of them or I would not have hosted them in my house or personally assisted them on my own time and dime. I just do the best job I can do for the people. I rely on progress and technology to help me serve and dont like people telling me I need to change or go backwards because of tradition.

    I hope that explains it and thank you for engaging me.

    Bou
    Last edited by CALFFBOU; 02-04-2009 at 04:37 PM.

  11. #36
    Permanently Removed
    CALFFBOU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    Its funny how some peoples posts continue to support the old adage
    " If they were half as good as they claim they are, they would be twice as good as they actually are."
    Or one of my favorites- "The more I learn, the more I realize the less I knew".

  12. #37
    Permanently Removed
    CALFFBOU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firenresq77 View Post
    OUCH!! Wonder where this one is going to go?!?!?!
    Right down the pooper with the rest of them.

  13. #38
    Forum Member
    nyckftbl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    On a Hill, overlooking George's Kingdom
    Posts
    2,579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanLoader View Post
    Its funny how some peoples posts continue to support the old adage
    " If they were half as good as they claim they are, they would be twice as good as they actually are."
    You use a stepladder to get on your soapbox, or does someone lift you up?
    Proud East Coast Traditionalist.

  14. #39
    Forum Member
    nyckftbl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    On a Hill, overlooking George's Kingdom
    Posts
    2,579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CALFFBOU View Post
    Right down the pooper with the rest of them.
    I was laughing like hell when I posted that...figured its been too quiet around here.
    Proud East Coast Traditionalist.

  15. #40
    Forum Member
    RFD1067's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Riverside Ca.
    Posts
    157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
    Hey Fred. Next, he'll be telling you that the initials FDNY actually originated in California.
    At least they could then claim to be progressive.

  16. #41
    Permanently Removed
    CALFFBOU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    6,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFD1067 View Post
    At least they could then claim to be progressive.
    If California had their say, it would be "NYFD".

  17. #42
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Dickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    It had to be approved by the county Sheriff first though.

    It must be nice to live in a place Dickey where you don't have to work with other agencies.
    Hey Ding Dong,

    It IS nice to work in a place where all the agencies work together. Here, the Sheriff takes care of law enforcement issues and the fire chief takes care of fire related issues. Both support each other whenever and wherever they need to.

    We don't have a micromanaging Sheriff that we have to ask first before the FD does anything. What does the Sheriff have to do with fire stuff anyways? It's a backwards set up.
    Jason Knecht
    Assistant Chief
    Altoona Fire Dept.
    Altoona, WI

    IACOJ - Director of Cheese and Whine
    http://www.cheddarvision.tv/
    EAT CHEESE OR DIE!!

  18. #43
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    We are so "progressive" that it isn't even progressive to call yourself progressive anymore. We've achieved such a high state of progressivicationess that we have been able to shed the mortal coil and remove all physical trappings such as PPE, apparatus, and hose. We're able to guarantee 100% success with nothing more then a notepad and, for the real tough jobs, a safety vest.

    wow you guys sound like you have your stuff together but I have a really important question for you guys....














    ....whats your favorite kind of lightbar?

  19. #44
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nameless View Post
    ....whats your favorite kind of lightbar?
    And can your Explorers put them on their POVs?
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  20. #45
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    When we arrive opn the scene of a homeowner burning property, including his home, the sheriff department does not decide if we are going to put it out or not.

    The law does.

    The state law here is simple. If you own it, you can destroy it. Burn it. Bulldoze it. Blow it up. Break it apart with a sledgehammer. As long as it does not endanger another's property. If it is, we control it. We have no legal right to extinguish it. None.

    If the owner says he wants his building to burn we have no legal right to put it out. None. And if we did, and he took us to civil court, we would lose.

    That is the law. I'm sorry you have a problem with that but those are the rules we follow. And the sheriff's department has to follow the law as well. They confirm ownership for us.

    The sheriff department confirms ownership since they ahve access via the computer in the cruiser to parish property records and they have the legal authority to arrest them if something isn't right.

    However, once they confirm ownership, we have to let it burn. It's the law.

    But they don't make the decision. if the legal owner is the one that says he wants to burn it, the law dictates what we do.

    We talked this to death in another thread. I really don't know why this concept is so tough to understand. We have no choice but to follow the law.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 02-05-2009 at 08:33 AM.

  21. #46
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    When we arrive opn the scene of a homeowner burning property, including his home, the sheriff department does not decide if we are going to put it out or not.

    The law does.

    The state law here is simple. If you own it, you can destroy it. Burn it. Bulldoze it. Blow it up. Break it apart with a sledgehammer. As long as it does not endanger another's property. If it is, we control it. We have no legal right to extinguish it. None.

    If the owner says he wants his building to burn we have no legal right to put it out. None. And if we did, and he took us to civil court, we would lose.

    That is the law. I'm sorry you have a problem with that but those are the rules we follow. And the sheriff's department has to follow the law as well. They confirm ownership for us.

    The sheriff department confirms ownership since they ahve access via the computer in the cruiser to parish property records and they have the legal authority to arrest them if something isn't right.

    However, once they confirm ownership, we have to let it burn. It's the law.

    But they don't make the decision. if the legal owner is the one that says he wants to burn it, the law dictates what we do.

    We talked this to death in another thread. I really don't know why this concept is so tough to understand. We have no choice but to follow the law.
    If he files an insurance claim, and the insurance co. finds out you let his property burn down, the insurance co. has every reason to come after your FD for the bulk of the damages. I would love to be involved in that case.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

  22. #47
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    No they don't George.

    Maybe that's the case in Jersey, but not here.

    There has never been a case in the state where that has happened. The attorney general has stated that fire departments cannot extinguish a fire where the owner has stated he does not want it extinguished unless there is a city or parish burn ordiance. That is the ruling of the top legal person in the state.

    And the courts have affirmed it.

    Let me explain this realllllllllllly slow.

    The state of Louisiana has no statewide burning ordinances. None. You can burn, according to state law, anything you own anytime you want, unless there is a city or parish ordinance prohibiting it.

    The fire districts do have the legal right to enact temporary burning bans due to weather and fire conditions.

    Our parish, like the majority of the parishes in the state have decided not to prohibit burning. Some require that you call the FD and inform them that you are burning, but that's basically a required courtesy. You can still burn whatever you please. The fire department cannot interfere unless your burning poses a threat to another persons property. That is the only time we are allowed by law to intervene. Period. And even then, we are only legally allowed to act in a manner to prevent extension. We cannot extinguish it.

    This property ownership right has been confirmed in the courts. If there is no parish ordinance prohibiting burning, we have no legal power to stop it unless it poses a threat to adjoining property. There for we have no duty to act. Really very simple.

    This policy is followed by every rural FD in the state where there are no burning ordinances. It has been legally tested. There are no problems with this procedure as it follows the law. In fact, the fire departments have no choice but to allow citizens to burn their homes, if they wish, because it is the law.

    There are penalties for attempting to collect on insurance if they burn thier own property. If the insurance company asks for our report, we provide it. it will clearly state that the homeowner refused our assistance. We also get a signed release. The courts have ruled that the release releases the department from any liability. We are simply following the law.

    I know you think you are the forum's legal expert, but the laws down here are very different from the other 49 states. it's based on Napoleonic code, not English law.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 02-05-2009 at 09:24 AM.

  23. #48
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    When we arrive opn the scene of a homeowner burning property, including his home, the sheriff department does not decide if we are going to put it out or not.

    The law does.

    The state law here is simple. If you own it, you can destroy it. Burn it. Bulldoze it. Blow it up. Break it apart with a sledgehammer. As long as it does not endanger another's property. If it is, we control it. We have no legal right to extinguish it. None.

    If the owner says he wants his building to burn we have no legal right to put it out. None. And if we did, and he took us to civil court, we would lose.

    That is the law. I'm sorry you have a problem with that but those are the rules we follow. And the sheriff's department has to follow the law as well. They confirm ownership for us.

    The sheriff department confirms ownership since they ahve access via the computer in the cruiser to parish property records and they have the legal authority to arrest them if something isn't right.

    However, once they confirm ownership, we have to let it burn. It's the law.

    But they don't make the decision. if the legal owner is the one that says he wants to burn it, the law dictates what we do.

    We talked this to death in another thread. I really don't know why this concept is so tough to understand. We have no choice but to follow the law.

    You should start "educating" your local, parish and state officials before coming on this forum and lecturing to the rest of the world...

    I know you think you are the forum's legal expert, but the laws down here are very different from the other 49 states. it's based on Napoleonic code, not English law.
    It's time for your personal Waterloo.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  24. #49
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,676

    Default

    Gonzo ...

    Property rights are king down here.

    There is a strong feeling among the population that their property is their property and nobody should be able to tell them what they can or cannot do with it. This is especially true in the areas outside of the cities.

    Most parishes have no building ordinances for private property. Most parishes do not require any type of permits to build or add on to private property. Most parishes have no zoning whatsoever. Most parishes have very few ordinances about anything property related.

    In the parishes, only public buildings or commercial buildings are required to be inspected for occupancy.

    It's simply the nature of the people down here.

    And the politicians on both the local and state level understand that.

    They want to be able to have 15 dead cars in the driveway or 25 dogs. They want to be able to burn what they want when they want how they want.

    And the politicians on the local level feel the same way.

    It's folks like me that want to limit burning that are in the VAST minority.

  25. #50
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    No they don't George.

    Maybe that's the case in Jersey, but not here.

    There has never been a case in the state where that has happened. The attorney general has stated that fire departments cannot extinguish a fire where the owner has stated he does not want it extinguished unless there is a city or parish burn ordiance. That is the ruling of the top legal person in the state.

    And the courts have affirmed it.

    Let me explain this realllllllllllly slow.

    The state of Louisiana has no statewide burning ordinances. None. You can burn, according to state law, anything you own anytime you want, unless there is a city or parish ordinance prohibiting it.

    The fire districts do have the legal right to enact temporary burning bans due to weather and fire conditions.

    Our parish, like the majority of the parishes in the state have decided not to prohibit burning. Some require that you call the FD and inform them that you are burning, but that's basically a required courtesy. You can still burn whatever you please. The fire department cannot interfere unless your burning poses a threat to another persons property. That is the only time we are allowed by law to intervene. Period. And even then, we are only legally allowed to act in a manner to prevent extension. We cannot extinguish it.

    This property ownership right has been confirmed in the courts. If there is no parish ordinance prohibiting burning, we have no legal power to stop it unless it poses a threat to adjoining property. There for we have no duty to act. Really very simple.

    This policy is followed by every rural FD in the state where there are no burning ordinances. It has been legally tested. There are no problems with this procedure as it follows the law. In fact, the fire departments have no choice but to allow citizens to burn their homes, if they wish, because it is the law.

    There are penalties for attempting to collect on insurance if they burn thier own property. If the insurance company asks for our report, we provide it. it will clearly state that the homeowner refused our assistance. We also get a signed release. The courts have ruled that the release releases the department from any liability. We are simply following the law.

    I know you think you are the forum's legal expert, but the laws down here are very different from the other 49 states. it's based on Napoleonic code, not English law.
    Let me explain THIS to you really slow...

    There are federal court cases (supercedes the state courts) that allow in an insurer to recover their damages from parties responsible for the damages. These cases are cut and dry and are the foundation for subrogation litigation today.

    If an insured property burns to the ground, the chance that the exact origin and cause of the loss diminshes greatly. The insurer may not be able to prove the culpability of the insured in court. But that does not preclude them from going after other parties.

    If the investigation revealed that the FD stood by and watched the insured property burned to the ground, there are very ffew insurance cos. who are not going to explore the possibility of subrogation against the party responsible for the increase in damages between what would have happened if the FD did their job and what happened when they were gutless and sttod by and watched. I know of several insurance cos. who would go after this case in a heartbeat.

    There would be some mitigating factors in that the FD didn't cause the fire, but it would be easy to meet the standard-gross negligence-to prove responsibility.

    And yes, it would be a case opened under federal jurisdiction if the insurance co. operates in more than one state. My estimate is that this would include about 99.999% of all insurance cos.

    So, you keep on working under the **** poor legal advice you have been given. l would think that if your FD members had any self-respect, that when they were faced with this situation, they would put the fire out and dare the property owner to sue them. In order to succesfully pursue litigation, he would have to prove damages. Please enlighten us as to how he would prove damages in a case such as this?

    I am not a lawyer and I do not give legal advice. I merely post in areas where I have knowledge of the legal area when I have been involved in the situations. I would welcome the input of any attorneys we may have on the forum as to my interpretation of the litigation prospects.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. wouldnt it be smart....
    By nnjfire in forum Hurricane Katrina & Rita Forums
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-22-2005, 07:14 PM
  2. Are you as smart as you think you are?
    By backdraft663 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-13-2005, 03:57 PM
  3. to move or not to move that is the question
    By Brian787 in forum Hiring & Employment Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-24-2004, 08:51 PM
  4. Nobody said he was smart
    By Steamer in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-28-2003, 05:28 PM
  5. This ole' boy is a smart one, he is...
    By Engine2medic2 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-28-2003, 03:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register