<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: &#8220;Texas Supreme Court: No tort liability for intentional misuse of a Genie lift&#8221;	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/05/texas-supreme-court-no-tort-liability-for-intentional-misuse-of-a-genie-lift/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/05/texas-supreme-court-no-tort-liability-for-intentional-misuse-of-a-genie-lift/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2015 12:54:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: gasman		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2015/05/texas-supreme-court-no-tort-liability-for-intentional-misuse-of-a-genie-lift/comment-page-1/#comment-323678</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gasman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2015 12:54:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=53165#comment-323678</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hmmm..  seems simple enough to to have an interlink that dis-allows retracting the stabilizing legs when the lift is above some certain elevation.  Sort of like having elevator doors only open when stopped at a floor.  

Human nature is to take short cuts, especially when there is an overt incentive to do so;  in most jobs, time is money and the quicker done, the sooner the next paying job starts.  Even when the failure mode is open and obvious for intentional retraction, I would want such a safety mechanism to prevent even the accidental/unintended retraction of the legs; 40 feet is well above typical lethal fall distance.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm..  seems simple enough to to have an interlink that dis-allows retracting the stabilizing legs when the lift is above some certain elevation.  Sort of like having elevator doors only open when stopped at a floor.  </p>
<p>Human nature is to take short cuts, especially when there is an overt incentive to do so;  in most jobs, time is money and the quicker done, the sooner the next paying job starts.  Even when the failure mode is open and obvious for intentional retraction, I would want such a safety mechanism to prevent even the accidental/unintended retraction of the legs; 40 feet is well above typical lethal fall distance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
