Re: [FWDLK] Miss Belvie's battery..

[eastern sierra Adj Services <esierraadj@xxxxxxxxx>]

Civil courts only require a Preponderance of Evidence be accepted by a
judge or jury (over 50% reasonability); Criminal courts require that a
finding of guilt be made based upon evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt"
(which-extent  is not actually defined, to the jury)---a much higher
standard of proof.

Neener-neener-neener is not an accepted legal rebuttal.

Neil Vedder


*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1

--- Begin Message ---

• From: "Jan & Roger van Hoy" <vanhilla@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:47:43 -0700

THERE WAS NO "SWITCHEROO!!!"

Where do you come up with these things?

--Roger van Hoy, Washougal, WA, '55 DeSoto, '58 DeSoto, '56 Plymouth, '66 Plymouth, '41 Dodge

----- Original Message ----- From: "eastern sierra Adj Services" <esierraadj@xxxxxxxxx> To: "Jan & Roger van Hoy" <vanhilla@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 12:11 AM
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] Miss Belvie's battery..

To Hold Harmless is a legal precept wherein I would agree not to
prosecute a claim against someone (the dealership), in a civil action.

I am not attempting to pursue any such claim, in fact, I am positing a
Theory of Liability against the dealership, for defrauding the poor,
unfortunate winning family from enjoying the fruits of having a real
MoPar group 24 battery be installed inside Ms. Belvie, and for their
incurring the heartbreak and emotional distress
upon discovering the imposter-battery inside the car.

You might say that the switcheroo was an assault upon their battery.


Neil Vedder

*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1

--- End Message ---