Our company deals with a case against a local company who care for disabled adults. We claimed that the negligence of the staff of Didlake, Inc. a disabled adult, Serialisierungslogik surgery for the installation of a titanium Rod severe injuries in his leg caused. Didlake denied the claim, denied it was responsible and was entitled, could be sued not because it was a "non-profit organization" charitable immunity.

The Court ruled that Didlake was right, that this severely disabled adults could not sue.

We took the matter to the Supreme Court of Virginia, and lost. We were in Didlake's assertion, as multi-million-dollar organization, issue, that it's on "Charitable immunity was claim."

Didlake won the Argumemt and full credit for them to claim the award-winning argument of this time.

The case is important, however. Charitable immunity is we believe that a relic from the dark ages, especially in a world of insurance (with Didlake) and the fact that the charitable immunity doctrine singles from only those who get the benefit of the charitable organization, and makes it the sacrificial Chamber lambs in the interest of something as bad defined and nebulous as "public interest".

As well, several bloggers picked up our press release and blogs and, of course, it is a court opinion on the case. Opinion is favourable for Didlake.

So its only very interesting, that Didlake is trying to convince down factual, truthful, blogs bloggers to take.

Seattle personal injury attorney Jason Epstein of blog here on the question.

Here is a report in the General press about the lawsuit against Didlake, Inc.

Here is an another blog about the lawsuit against Didlake.

Here, the Didlake is a letter to the lawyer-bloggers.

One comment to "asks Didlake, Inc Attorney blogger factual post on action remove"

Message:

Notify me of follow up comments via e-Mail.

For security purposes, you give the graphic text in the box below: [press F5 if you can't read the text]

View the original article here