Quote:
Originally Posted by Dueller
You can be your own witness...not necessary to corroborate. But still...his theory is a bit off base. This wasn't a bailment as there is no indication they accepted delivery of the coat. Assuming arguendo they somehow did accept it and it was a bailment, then its obviously solely for his benefit and in such cases the bailee would only be responsible for gross negligence such as mis-delivery. But like I said no indication a bailment.
Certainly no contract involved so that theory is out. Tortious conversion...that's a stretch. Tough to prove someone knew it was his and converted to their own use. That leaves negligence. To prove the tort of negligence you have to show 1) Duty owed 2) breach of that duty 3) proximate cause of damages (loss) AND 4) Damages. While he may have suffered damages (loss of coat), it will fail on the duty portion. Must have all 4 elements to prove recovery under tort theory. Even if they did you would have the defense of contributory negligence or comparative fault of the dapper polo wearing lawyer.
Class dismissed  |
So, being a lawyer and supposed to know the above, could we call his action attempted extortion?