Hi Rich, as you were just saying about Re: Censorship....
RW> CC> Another senario.  There is a major spill.  There is a sign 
RW> CC> over the spill.  However, a person chooses to act like an 
RW> CC> idiot, run through the resturaunt therefore slipping and 
RW> CC> busting his/her head.  Should he/she be able to sue?
RW> 
RW> RT> scenario, if the signs are properly in place regarding the
RW> RT> wet floor and someone neglects to heed them, they are at
RW> RT> fault.  The key is the signs being properly in place so that
RW> RT> they are readily seen from any angle of approach.
RW> 
RW> There is another thing to consider in this.  That is
RW> whether or not the restaurant is attempting to remove
RW> the spill.  If they are making a good faith effort to
RW> remove the hazard and the hazard is well marked then
RW> there should be no grounds for the suit.  If either of
RW> these are missing there might be grounds.
Yep. 
RD 
sandman@azstarnet.com - A newspaper ISP - Arizona Daily Star
sandman@brassroots.org - A no compromise gun rights organization.
http://www.azstarnet.com/~sandman
___
 X KWQ/2 1.2i X Is he from the shallow end of the Gene pool?
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------