Channel 7 and Harrison FD

[Guest Legal Owl Too]

I'm not going to go down to your level and berate you. I'll repeat the point I've made all along: there is NO municipal liability for negligence in providing police or fire protection services.

So let's recap: the earlier posting by you (singular or plural) that said the town better be insured for lawsuits was incorrect.

I then posted the basic law that protects municipalities from lawsuits for police and fire protection, and I was accused of making it up with demeaning sarcasm.

I responded with a web link to a basic legal treatise. The next response was the equivalent, "of course, I know that" and then tried to one-up me by referring to several cases for the proposition that cases are filed and there is a risk of liability against municipalities for police and fire services.

I then responded by pointing out what those cases say: they restate the basic point that I was making all along of NO municipal liability. I also pointed out the cases that were not Supreme Court of the US because you were the one that cited those cases and used the acronym "SCOTUS" for all of them.

Your latest response is more petty sarcasm. You gave away that you're with Kearny Fire. I still say you're very high up in the hierarchy. If I'm right, this exchange is very disappointing.

You're correct,..i mean after all, " I dont know if there are any similar Appellate, US DIstrict, or SCOTUS rulings concerning FD's" and "Really couldnt care less about firefighting, as far as the law goes," are So Ambiguous.......... Almost wish I wasnt retired now...i could have had a LOT of fun with you in court.... making attorneys who are arrogant far beyond their abilities embarassed was somewhat of a Hobby.

[Guest Guest]

I'm not going to go down to your level and berate you. I'll repeat the point I've made all along: there is NO municipal liability for negligence in providing police or fire protection services.

So let's recap: the earlier posting by you (singular or plural) that said the town better be insured for lawsuits was incorrect.

I then posted the basic law that protects municipalities from lawsuits for police and fire protection, and I was accused of making it up with demeaning sarcasm.

I responded with a web link to a basic legal treatise. The next response was the equivalent, "of course, I know that" and then tried to one-up me by referring to several cases for the proposition that cases are filed and there is a risk of liability against municipalities for police and fire services.

I then responded by pointing out what those cases say: they restate the basic point that I was making all along of NO municipal liability. I also pointed out the cases that were not Supreme Court of the US because you were the one that cited those cases and used the acronym "SCOTUS" for all of them.

Your latest response is more petty sarcasm. You gave away that you're with Kearny Fire. I still say you're very high up in the hierarchy. If I'm right, this exchange is very disappointing.

Of course, because once again the VERY Ambiguous "Almost wish i wasnt retired, i could have had fun with you in court" Is something that a Firefighter would say. Do yourself a favor Councillor, and line up a secondary career, because you're a sucky attorney if you couldnt even manage to tell the difference between a cop and a firefighter.

[Guest Harrison Senior]

"Professional" firefighter?

[Guest Toms River Volunteer]

All firemen should be a volunteer force. In every town Simple as that. You Bennies are all alike.

[Guest Guest]

Wow that Toms River education isn't all what it's supposedly cracked up to be I see.

[Guest Harrison Senior]

"Professional" firefighter?

"Professional" firefighter?

Barney, you know you'd give a kidney to become a professional firefighter.

[Guest Legal Owl Three]

Of course, because once again the VERY Ambiguous "Almost wish i wasnt retired, i could have had fun with you in court" Is something that a Firefighter would say. Do yourself a favor Councillor, and line up a secondary career, because you're a sucky attorney if you couldnt even manage to tell the difference between a cop and a firefighter.

I (we) stand behind all the Legal Owl postings above which speak for themselves. As for my claim that you are a firefighter, I think your over reaction confirms I'm right. As I said above, I am disappointed. I'll add "chief" to that this time.