[month-index] [thread-index] [prev] [next] [thread-prev] [thread-next]

Im not going to comment on whether this was a wise original post or not;
most of us have an opinion, including me. However, I will tell you that
proving "intent" is one of the most challenging aspects of being a lawyer.
Its also one of the most difficult. Aviation law is no different.

"Tim Helton" wrote in message
news:_Wvp5.124$rJ4.7791@eagle.america.net...
> > > And for that same reason, Im not sure its wise for you to post the
> > > information. What was your intention? If it turns out that the AP/IA
> did
> > > nothing worng, you may find yourself on the south side of a lawsuit.
> > >
> > And what lawsuit is that. The information is of public record. The
fact
> > that he has been served is the truth. He made no other statements other
> > than the fact it came out of his initial complaint to the FAA, so it
seems
> > to be little that is actionable.
>
> If the original posters intent was to harm the reputation of the
mechanic,
> which to me appears to be the case, and if the mechanic is later cleared
of
> the allegations, you can bet your last dollar that its actionable.
>
> I dont see how the original poster benefitted from posting the
information.
> Nobody asked him and he didnt do it to warn others (which would have been
> real unwise prior to an official finding).
>
> tim
>
>

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous Message:: Re: FAA Notice of Proposed Certificate Action
Next Message:: Re: FAA Notice of Proposed Certificate Action
Previous message in thread:: Re: FAA Notice of Proposed Certificate Action
Next message in thread:: Re: FAA Notice of Proposed Certificate Action