Transcript
November 01, 2010. I've referenced this before, but see Foster v. Preston Mill Co., 268 P.2d 645 (Wash. 1954) and this. Under tort law, you are strictly liable for the consequences of "ultrahazardous" activities. In contrast, when engaged in less-than-ultra-hazardous activities, you are only liable if you are negligent and breach a standard of care. Modern tort law uses the term "inherently dangerous" rather than "ultrahazardous," but I think ultrahazardous sounds funnier.
And one more thing.
Ultrahazardous
Brown Rabbit wakes up next to a Beer-pong / Beirut table with plastic beer cups.
Negligent Lop: I see you had a fun night.
Brown Rabbit: I'm holding you liable
for this headache.
Negligent Lop: Come again?
Brown Rabbit: Strictly liable.
End of panel.
Brown Rabbit (off-panel): Everclear and Tort Bunny
have two things in common.
Brown Rabbit (off-panel): One, they are both
ultrahazardous. Two,
you brought them both
to last night's party.
End of panel.
Negligent Lop: Tort Bunny isn't
ultrahazardous.
Brown Rabbit: She hit me in the face. Also,
her name is Tort Bunny.
Brown Rabbit has a black eye.
End of panel.
Negligent Lop: Well, my name is Negligent Lop.
Brown Rabbit: If you want to dig that hole,
I will gladly hand you a shovel
once my hangover is done
hitting me on the head with it.
End of panel.
Negligent Lop: You know what's inherently
dangerous? Yo momma.
Brown Rabbit: That's actually true. My
mother was startled by
an explosion when I was
born and instinctively
tried to eat me.
End of panel.
Negligent Lop: I ... I had no idea.
Brown Rabbit: No one ever does.
End of comic.
Comments