"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 00:28:16 -0400, "Larry Smith"
wrote:

Let's say a divorced man bought a V8-powered Prescott Pusher, which is a
real sure-enough assbuster, and had his two adult sons sign (along with
him)
an indemnity agreement with the seller. The latter is held harmless
thereby under the circumstances, since those children are the only
parties
with a chance to sue in the case of the buyer getting his a** busted.

...unless he busts it on someone else's property, at which point that
person could sue the original builder.

Well, Ray, rare but possible I guess. I'm talking about suits which have a
degree of possibility getting to the jury. In your hypothetical, it would
be doubtful.


Or the man's parents could sue

His children are his heirs at law, not his parents. If he's childless, a
parent may be an heir. I'm thinking of John Denver. Wasn't he childless?

, or
the man's mistress


Nope, she has no standing to sue, except maybe in CA or in a state with
common law marriage.


, or the man's business partner, or the man's
Guatemalan-kids-he-never-knew-he-had (ref. Alaska 261).

OK.

All it takes is a perception of a deep pocket, and SOMEONE will find an
excuse to sue the builder....

Getting a lawsuit to a jury is expensive but just getting it to the stage
where the judge dismisses it because the plaintiff is unable to connect the
injury to the defendant is not. Let's face it, Ray. Suits against
aircraft builders very improbable.

Ron "naturally protected" Wanttaja

Me too. Shallow pockets.