You touch it you own it????or do you

[Terrynistler]

MD and myself as well as others had this exact conversation on another board several months ago. I was asked to do a (simple) service upgrade required by the poco. I am still shuddering at what I saw. I explained to the customer very professionally why I could not perform the work and gave them a approx cost of being able to do it legally. They got extremely upset and even called me in to the ahj. The ahj redtagged the entire house and told them they would have to get it fixed entirely before the power could be turned back on. They then proceeded to call guess who for an estimate. I think it is always good to look around and make sure that what you are doing is not helping an already bad situation get worse. just my 2 cents

 

[iwire]

For those that have had to call upon their hired guns in a shot-gun blast style lawsuit, mention the term "Malicious Prosecution"

Celtic from reading the link I do not see that it applies here.

The attorney would have to have named you in the suit out of malice or just to mess with you.

It appears standard procedure is to name everyone and anyone if it turns out someone is not involved they can be dropped.

Of course I am as far from a lawyer as I can be.

 

[celtic]

The attorney would have to have named you in the suit out of malice or just to mess with you.

It appears standard procedure is to name everyone and anyone if it turns out someone is not involved they can be dropped.

Another definition of "malicious prosecution":

is a common law intentional tort. While similar to the tort of abuse of process, its elements include
(1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting or pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is
(2) brought without probable cause and
(3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution.

In some jurisdictions, "malicious prosecution" is reserved for the wrongful initiation of criminal proceedings, while "malicious use of process" refers to the wrongful initiation of civil proceedings.

( malicious prosecution~ MP; malicious use of process ~ MUOP)

This is the "shot-gun" blast type lawsuit - just name everyone, it'll all get sorted out...eventually...and in the meantime, you can just pay to have an atty on retainer and review various documents...and when that money is spent, re-up...and maybe, just maybe you won't have to make an actual appearance.

It's the "if it turns outsomeone is not involved" (item #2 from definition above)aspect I have issue with.

The basic premise behind MP concept is "SLAPP" and frivilous lawsuits. It is a fact that "anyone can be sued by anyone at any any time"..but what remedy does the defendant have against these allegations? Shut up and pay(atty's, court fees, lost time, etc) to clear your name? How does one recover these costs?

The plaintiff who brought the charges may (or may not, if "shot-gun style") firmly believe that their complaint is valid....and thier costs are the price of bringing charges against another.
The defendant, on the other hand, (quilty or not) virtually, has no choice but to have themselves properly represented.

The mere mention of MP(or MUOP), is sometimes enough to have the plaintiffs reconsider the type of shell they load into their shotgun and completely avoid #3 above.

Of course I am as far from a lawyer as I can be.

I am not a lawyer either....but should a person require their services and has made the decision to retain their services...asking a few questions won't increase the bill.

 

[iwire]

Celtic I think the shot gun blast method is in our terms "a common trade practice" of lawyers.

IMO unless you can prove the intent of naming you was to cost you money or inconvenience you, or to cost you customers I don't think you have a leg to stand on.

The lawyer was simply being a strong advocate for their client.

I don't necessarily see this as fair but lawyers write the laws and they are in no rush to slow down law suits.....it's their bread and butter.

But if anyone finds them self in this position by all means get professional help.

 

[brian john]

I believe if you did not have anything to do with the questionable installation, and if you saw this installation did mention the issue to the customer, I believe you would not be held liable. But as Don said seek help AT ONCE, notify your insurance company AT ONCE.

This may vary from state to state, but in VA in the criminal court you pay for your attorney, if it goes to civil court the insurance company pays, though IMO I would hire a private lawyer to verify the insurance company is working in your best interest.