Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

#T3BE 293 - Early Answer for Patrons (Patreon)

Published:
2022-09-12 23:00:03
Imported:
2022-10

Content

Thomas (eventually) gets this one right, picking (B), and is 153-for-293 (52.2%)!

Files

Comments

Quark Twain

Wow, "trespass to chattels", of course! 🙄 Yeesh. This answer is completely unsatisfying and makes me feel like the law is a magical incantation. I hope Andrew makes more sense of it. I chose A over B because it seems like the most sensible answer across all situations. The goal of the court should be to make the neighbor (the one who owns the hose) whole. If the damage is repairable, they should refund to the neighbor the cost of repairs. If the cost of repairs exceeds the cost of replacement, then the most economical "repair" is to replace the hose completely. Either way, the cost of repairs is a fair measure. The value of the hose at the time it was damaged is an inferior measure. The hose was almost new, so does it still retain its full purchase value? Or is it only worth what the owner could have sold it for on Craigslist? And what if the price of new hoses is volatile? The court shouldn't get bogged down in such flighty questions. Just reimburse the *replacement* cost of the hose, rather than its hypothetical historic value.