- NEW!
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
Help answer this question below.
by I love my baby on October 2nd, 2007
I doubt it seriously because of this.
Important: Answerbag cannot guarantee the accuracy of answers submitted by members, and we recommend that you use common sense when following any advice found here. Read full disclaimer.
by Jade on October 2nd, 2007
No..there is a disclaimer.
by Meow Meow 1BadMutha TBMF on October 2nd, 2007
No. It says this at the bottonm of every page:
Important: Answerbag cannot guarantee the accuracy of answers submitted by members, and we recommend that you use common sense when following any advice found here. Read full disclaimer.
by LadyLuck on October 2nd, 2007
Nope. It was the user's decision to or not to follow the advice.
by CuppyCake is actually missing Ohio... on October 2nd, 2007
No...because of this:
Important: Answerbag cannot guarantee the accuracy of answers submitted by members, and we recommend that you use common sense when following any advice found here. Read full disclaimer.
by Sheriff Raff -Answerhag on December 7th, 2008
On the other side of the coin, think about how many people have not killed themselves because of just some understanding and empathy of strangers on AB. I think more people have been "saved" than those that might have suffered.
by Teri on December 7th, 2008
They have a disclaimer stating they are not.....
by Dr_Dredd on December 7th, 2008
As others have mentioned, the disclaimer may limit liability to AB. But what about the person who gave the advice? Would it make any difference if they were a professional versus non-professional?
Filing late for widow SS benefits(depression-shock & grief), told would only be paid for 6-months back. Why? I am entitled to them!
by battywu on January 5th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
how do I find out the length of a federal sentence. I know his sentice date and crime need to know when he will be out.
by fnp93 on March 4th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
My Score in Quadrapop is 1.8 million,does anyone have higher?????
by sateshb on January 6th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Are there any countries that a U.S citizen can fo to that does not require a passport?
by petersox on November 23rd, 2010
| 1 person likes this
Iam curious what we need to do or who to talk to in order to get my father a tombstone and gain posessions for sentiment.
by alyssalauren1987 on January 2nd, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading With non-professionals giving answers to medical questions, what if someone acts on bad advice and dies? Is AB not held partially responsible?
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
great answer +'s for you my friend
by Blank Savage on October 2nd, 2007
A disclaimer often has little or no weight in a court of law.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
Thanks Blank.
@Highlander, Really? It seems to me it it self explanatory. How could it not be good enough?
by I love my baby on October 2nd, 2007
Think about it. If all you had to do was write a notice of disclaimer and you were clear of all liability, don't you think people would do that? No, it's not that easy. Secondly, who is to say that people have read the disclaimer, understood it? Like I said it's better than nothing but in court isn't worth much.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
Highlander: A disclaimer (or the legal term, indemnity clause)is binding in most (if not all) jurisdictions. You cannot indemnify yourself from gross negligence, but you can indemnify yourself from negligence. These disclaimers are often attacked because they don't give adequate notice or are not predominately displayed to actually give notice.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
It is plenty good enough to fool people like me with out any knowledge about it. ;) I do see your point.
by I love my baby on October 2nd, 2007
Anonymous, A disclaimer is rarely a cure-all for legal claims, but, I agree that if a disclaimer is prominently displayed and clearly written, a court may take it into consideration as a factor limiting damages. In some cases, such as trademark disputes, it may help prevent any liability. With the Internet, you have a complexity of laws surrounding jurisdiction.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
It is a cure all for many claims. For example, assume you are at a hotel and you give your keys to the valet. On the back of the stub there is a disclaimer that says the valet company will not be responsible for damages to your car while in our care. Now assume the valet brings the car back and it has a scratch down the side. You sue. What result? You lose in almost every state in America.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
I do not think that this would be the case if the Valet drove your car into another on the lot. It's a matter of due diligence. BTW do you have case law on what your suggesting?
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
I used to work for a multi-state parking management company, and I have tried this exact issue on may occasions. Even when our valets caused the damage, we were not held liable. The only case we ever lost was when a valet gave the keys to someone other than the owner without verifying identity. The court considered this gross negligence, and therefore outside the protection of our indemnity clause.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
Indemnity clauses can be attacked on the basis that the don't give proper notice. For example, a sky diving company that has an indemnity clause saying you assume the risk of harm caused as a result of the jump, even if we are negligent, is valid if your chute does not open. But what if the pilot was negligent and crashes? Well, this is separate from the jump and may not cover the company. But note: the reason why it is ineffective is because the clause is limited to the jump, and does not address the flight leading up to the jump. The test is usually whether a reasonable person would be aware of the risk.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
I think it reasonable for the disclaimer to cover minor damage not directly caused by an employee of the company. In the example I suggested however, an overt action would be caused by the employee and would be beyond the scope and intent of the disclaimer. Neglegence could be proven as could culpability.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
Negligence could be proven, but you can disclaim negligence. You cannot disclaim gross negligence. Thus, in order to defeat the indemnity clause you must prove gross negligence. Scraping a car against another is almost never gross negligence.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
Your sky-diving example is a good one. You would have a signed disclaimer. This would protect the company unless gross negligence could be attributed to an employee to wit, the chute would be examined. As a past criminal prosecutor, I can assure you that a disclaimer does not afford any protection from criminal negligence or other criminal charges.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
We could have a discussion on negligence and gross negligence, but again there are other factors involved as well. We do however seem to be diverting off of the topic, Web disclosures... Thanks for the discussion. :-)
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
I do not deal with criminal law, but I have heard this before. My understanding is that you cannot disclaim any criminal activity. This makes sense because a crime is a harm to society as a whole. I am only talking about civil liability. As long as your disclaimer is properly made, it will protect you, even if you are negligent (but not if you were grossly negligent).
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
I wouldn't put much faith in a disclaimer Anonymous. Granted it's better than nothing, but it's not a magical shield. There are disclaimers on cigarette packages, as well as other warnings. There're billions of dollars of successful claims against cigarette companies being awarded by the courts. So far the disclaimers haven't affected the cases at all.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
The disclaimers on cigarettes are statutorily mandated and vague. Disclaimers are effective if you actually disclaim what you are being sued about. A person with lung cancer who started smoking back when the cigarette industry told them it was safe is not going to be estopped from suit because today cigarette packs state that cigarettes might casue birth defects or cancer. Again, you can disclaim negligence, not gross negligence.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
Perhaps it's best to read the case law.
by Highlander is semi-retired from AB on October 2nd, 2007
I would recommend you do that before espousing a general rule that disclaimers are ineffective. You will notice that cases are very consistent about their treatment of indemnity clauses. The instances in which they are found ineffective nearly always falls in one of four categories: 1) the clause does not address the harm that actually occurred; 2) the clause does not adequately warn of the risks involved; 3) the clause was not conspicuously displayed as to give notice of the disclaimer (usually in cases where there is no signed waiver); or 4) the disclaimer indemnified against negligence, but the party was grossly negligent.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007
In some states there is a fifth scenario. That is, in some states there is specific statutory language that must be used for certain disclaimers. In those states, a failure to follow the statutory language makes the disclaimer ineffective.
by Anonymous on October 2nd, 2007