Vi:
Good afternoon, I hope that this message finds you well.
I just had a conversation with our contact at SEA today, and they advised that they had still not acquired an exemplar light pipe for testing. Moreover, SEA indicates that they contacted the folks with Illuminations, Inc.—the distributor that you and James had recommended—and that they have yet to respond to SEA’s request for a light pipe. Specifically, SEA is having trouble finding a light pipe with the particular extension kit used in this particular project. Moreover, when SEA does acquire the exemplar, they have advised that further the testing could take multiple weeks—perhaps months. We are, of course, disappointed with the lack of progress on this issue, and we desire strongly to move forward with regard to subrogation. As we assess the situation, there appears to be two viable options from our prospective.
First, we could continue …show more content…
Using this information, we could draft a complaint alleging negligence on a theory of res ipsa loquitur. This basically means that negligence—although not affirmatively established—may be inferred “when the circumstances of the incident, without further proof, are such that, in the ordinary course of events, the incident could not have happened except on the theory of negligence.” Lewis v. Carpenter Co., 252 Va. 296, 300 (1996). This legal doctrine, however, is incredibly narrow. Accordingly, there is a significant risk that our complaint might not survive a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment, but with careful drafting, we think we can allege a cause of
Good afternoon, I hope that this message finds you well.
I just had a conversation with our contact at SEA today, and they advised that they had still not acquired an exemplar light pipe for testing. Moreover, SEA indicates that they contacted the folks with Illuminations, Inc.—the distributor that you and James had recommended—and that they have yet to respond to SEA’s request for a light pipe. Specifically, SEA is having trouble finding a light pipe with the particular extension kit used in this particular project. Moreover, when SEA does acquire the exemplar, they have advised that further the testing could take multiple weeks—perhaps months. We are, of course, disappointed with the lack of progress on this issue, and we desire strongly to move forward with regard to subrogation. As we assess the situation, there appears to be two viable options from our prospective.
First, we could continue …show more content…
Using this information, we could draft a complaint alleging negligence on a theory of res ipsa loquitur. This basically means that negligence—although not affirmatively established—may be inferred “when the circumstances of the incident, without further proof, are such that, in the ordinary course of events, the incident could not have happened except on the theory of negligence.” Lewis v. Carpenter Co., 252 Va. 296, 300 (1996). This legal doctrine, however, is incredibly narrow. Accordingly, there is a significant risk that our complaint might not survive a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment, but with careful drafting, we think we can allege a cause of