Suits Over Building Collapse Not "Despicable" Nor Premature

Good Reasons and Latin Maxim Support Legal Action Now - Class Action Expert
 
WASHINGTON - June 26, 2021 - PRLog -- A lawyer for the owners of the colapsed building blasted a law suit as "despicable," while another lawyer attacked legal action now, saying that since no one knows what caused the collapse, the lawyer filing the law suit certainly doesn't.

But both are very wrong, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf.

It's important for lawyers representing victims of any tragedy to move quickly, says Banzhaf, since the filing of even one law suit puts everyone involved on legal notice of the need to preserve - and certainly not to destroy or "lose" - anything in the way of documents or otherwise which might serve as evidence.

Unfortunately, without such legal notice, documents too often do turn out to be "missing," or even destroyed as part of a so-called periodic purging of files,

It's also important for attorneys to act quickly to pin down testimony before memories fade or, worse, stories are concocted and agreed to by those who might have something to hide, he says.

The argument that attorneys should not file a law suit until the precise cause or causes of the building collapse are known is also wrong says Banzhaf, because of an ancient legal doctrine.

Ordinarily an attorney seeking to hold some entity liable for negligence must prove the negligence by showing some specific way in which the defendant failed to take reasonable care.  This can often be a difficult task..

But an exception to that requirement is known by the Latin phrase "Res Ipsa Loquitur," which means that "the thing speaks for itself."

If something virtually certainly doesn't occur unless there is negligence, and neither the plaintiff or some third party could have caused the accident, jurors are told that the accident speaks for itself, and that they can find that negligence occurred.

An elevator which suddenly drops to the bottom of the shaft, or two trains traveling in opposite directions tying to pass each other on a single track, are common and often cited examples where the circumstances speak for themselves and negligence is clear; at least unless and until the defendant proves a cause over which it had no control; e.g., a madman cut the elevator cable; terrorists took control of one or both trains, etc.

As numerous experts have already assured the public, large buildings in major developed countries just do not suddenly collapse, at least in the absence of an earthquake, major explosion, or some other powerful force.  So attorneys can - and probably will - rely one res ipsa, as well as on factor such as neglecting warnings from engineers, delaying repairs, etc.

http://banzhaf.net/   jbanzhaf3ATgmail.com   @profbanzhaf

Contact
GW LAW
***@gmail.com
End
Source: » Follow
Email:***@gmail.com
Tags:Condo Collapse
Industry:Legal
Location:Washington - District of Columbia - United States
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse
Public Interest Law Professor John Banzhaf News
Trending
Most Viewed
Daily News



Like PRLog?
9K2K1K
Click to Share