Saturday, April 29, 2006

Aww geez . . .

Last semester, during my Torts review session, there was a girl having a very difficult time understanding a concept.

She asked several questions about how a casual relationship could give rise to liability. Obviously, if there is a casual relationship, there is no intimacy, so how could the But-For test apply?

The Prof. had a difficult time understanding her question. For whatever reason he could not understand what the hell she was talking about.

I felt his pain. After all, I understood immediately, but seeing as how I rubberneck car accidents, I did not say anything. After all, everything she needed to know was right there in the book.

What did the book say? I am pretty sure that it was talking about a causal relationship. So much for those critical reading skills.

1 comment:

lawschoolrules said...

This one still cracks me up. People can be so stupid sometimes.