Quote:
Originally Posted by HuskyMan
from the link you provided:
"When there is only a general duty to protect the public, there is no duty of care to an individual citizen which may result in liability. In short a duty to all is a duty to no one."
Did you pick up on that one? THEY DON'T OWE ANYONE ANYTHING - REPEAT - NEWS FLASH - NEWS UPDATE THEY DON'T OWE ANYONE ANYTHING. Keep drinking the Koolaid, it must taste good going down!
|
I'm sorry. What is your point? It doesn't owe any one citizen a thing under certain circumstances. You probably don't want to read the entire article. Much better to cherry pick a line.
Quote:
|
In the context of the public duty doctrine, to establish a special relationship, the plaintiff must show (1) some form of privity or direct contact between the government agency and the plaintiff that sets the plaintiff apart from the general public; (2) the agency gave the plaintiff specific assurances that resulted in the agency undertaking a duty; and (3) the plaintiff justifiably relied upon those assurances. [O'Brien v. City of Tacoma, 247 Fed. Appx. 58 (9th Cir. Wash. 2007)]
|
Context helps. Try not to cherry pick one line out of an article. The rule is to prevent people like you from cherry picking one line and tossing lawsuits making them a "McDonnalds" case and responsible for you spilling coffee on your crotch.