|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Ryan Bayne on Tuesday, April 15 2003 @ 07:39 PM CDT |
I think the university has to show that Fed had the problems listed in their statement of defence: over-crowding, over-consumption, allowing intoxicated patrons, failure to employ the agreed upon sign-in proceedure, failure to conduct searches, failure to ensure orderly conduct, failure to ensure adequate supervision and failure to have an exec/senior staff supervising.
The question of liability for the beating I would believe would fall into a seperate lawsuit if one were to be filed by the victim or his family. The university's defense is that they were justified in revoking the license due to a number of ongoing issues that were brought to attention by the beating. To me, the actual liability for the beating falls outside of this lawsuit which is about contracts, misrepresentation, trespass, etc. That's why I think the question of how the police behaved that evening shouldn't really be an issue in this case, which isn't to say that it's okay if the Feds claims are true, just irrelevant to their case.[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
