Comments for Wisconsin Business and Commercial Litigation

Comment on Wisconsin Assembly Bill Would Limit Online Access to Public Records by John Y

John Y — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:12:36 +0000

The most important part of this bill is the removal of defendents who are found innocent or had their changes dropped.

If a case was not strong enough for a conviction, then the defendant should not be subject to the disadvantages of being associated with the unproven charges.

As far as I am concerned, that database has too many instances of people being labeled criminals when they clearly are not. Let the innocent be free of labels.

Comment on Wisconsin Assembly Bill Would Limit Online Access to Public Records by Aaron S. Robertson

Aaron S. Robertson — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:06:16 +0000

I guess I’m on the fence on this one, but I am leaning more toward opposing the bill.

I share the concerns that attorney Keith A. Findley has in his support of the bill. It would be a shame for someone to lose out big on a contract, employment, a lease, whatever, because of some petty matter in the past, a matter in which the person may have even been found “not guilty”.

However, I also understand the grave importance of having unhindered freedom to information when making critical decisions (such as whether or not to accept a check as a form of payment from someone, whether or not to take someone on as a client or employee, etc.). I’ll admit, I check the Web site from time to time if I suspect a potential client has run into trouble before as far as civil suits go.

Comment on Big Brother or Big Mother? by Aaron S. Robertson

Aaron S. Robertson — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:28:56 +0000

Interesting. I have job experience as a produce clerk in a grocery store, and Ziemer’s article answers my questions on how these standards in the business came to be.

Personally, I think this is bureaucratic bull(expletive). Let shops and cafes sell produce however they want to. If a cafe wants to sell bananas at 90 cents per, let it…and if customers feel the price is too high, then they won’t buy at that rate. Let the free market work.

Comment on Social Networking Sites Provide Fertile Ground for Lawyers, Potential Problems for Employers by Aaron S. Robertson

Aaron S. Robertson — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 00:52:20 +0000

Excellent points you raise here. I checked out Sorry I Missed Your Party, and I couldn’t believe what I saw! All too often, I notice how camera -happy many young people can be…they can’t seem to go to any party, function, or outing without a camera. And they can’t wait to get home right away so that they can upload their drunken and semi-nude photos. Unbelievable.

Comment on Now THAT’s Unforeseeable: Employer Liability for the “Adulteration” of ID Badge Photos and Subsequent Web Posting by admin

admin — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:04:21 +0000

The elements of negligence, and particularly foreseeability and public policy, is one of the places in the law where common sense rears its head from time to time. The issue that you raise, Aaron, a sensible stopping point, is one of the areas specifically discussed by the court in its opinion.

Comment on Terms, Conditions, Disclaimers, Warnings and Other Law Talk by Aaron S. Robertson

Aaron S. Robertson — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:09:56 +0000

Well put, Noah! You tell us!

Comment on Now THAT’s Unforeseeable: Employer Liability for the “Adulteration” of ID Badge Photos and Subsequent Web Posting by Aaron S. Robertson

Aaron S. Robertson — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:38:12 +0000

I’m not an attorney, but the court’s final decision, from a commonsense viewpoint, was just. If Securitas is determined to be found liable, in any way, then where does it end?