# Firefighters- Guardians of Corporate Welfare? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 24, 2001, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347 "2001-10-24T17:56:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e19b73/32.png) [@Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mary_Hart_s_Legs)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/41 "2001-10-25T18:23:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SuaSponte \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Mary Hart’s Legs \* > > There should be no confusion here, as due diligence has a very precise legal meaning is our discussion. > > > > You are correct to suggest that this refers to the “negligence standard” that being: > > > > 1. doing what a reasonable entity would do in the circumstance being described > > 2)affording a level of care or attention which is appropriate to the caregivers title > > > > There is a VERY different standard between what a member of the public provides in response to an emergency and what a corporation would provide. > > You are a riot, **MHL**. If you believe that what you just wrote is in any way related to legal reality, the only explanation I can think of is (a) you no legal training whatsoever, or (b) you went to law school at Harvard. In truth, (a) and (b) are the same thing. > > Sua \*\* I’ll give you a very simple example: (Refer to def’n above) 1. Car accident with 6 people injured 2)Variance of care afforded between a doctor or a First-Aider ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/42 "2001-10-25T18:36:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mary Hart’s Legs \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by SuaSponte \* > > \*\* > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > \*Originally posted by Mary Hart’s Legs \* > > > There should be no confusion here, as due diligence has a very precise legal meaning is our discussion. > > > > > > You are correct to suggest that this refers to the “negligence standard” that being: > > > > > > 1. doing what a reasonable entity would do in the circumstance being described > > > 2)affording a level of care or attention which is appropriate to the caregivers title > > > > > > There is a VERY different standard between what a member of the public provides in response to an emergency and what a corporation would provide. > > > > You are a riot, **MHL**. If you believe that what you just wrote is in any way related to legal reality, the only explanation I can think of is (a) you no legal training whatsoever, or (b) you went to law school at Harvard. In truth, (a) and (b) are the same thing. > > > > Sua \*\* > > I’ll give you a very simple example: > > (Refer to def’n above) > > 1. Car accident with 6 people injured > 2)Variance of care afforded between a doctor or a First-Aider \*\* Um, why are you talking about malpractice? Corporations are not liable under malpractice standards. Sua ---
**Author:** ![Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e19b73/32.png) [@Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mary_Hart_s_Legs)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/43 "2001-10-25T18:38:32Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Bricker \* > Actually, firefighters work for no salary at all. This is why you see “volunteer” in front of many firestations. There is no corporate involvement; these brave people simply like helping others. Your point, **Mary hart’s Legs** , is thus decimated._\* Actually…you don’t understand. ---
**Author:** ![Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e19b73/32.png) [@Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mary_Hart_s_Legs)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/44 "2001-10-25T18:45:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SuaSponte \* > I’ll give you a very simple example: > > (Refer to def’n above) > > 1. Car accident with 6 people injured > 2)Variance of care afforded between a doctor or a First-Aider \*\* Um, why are you talking about malpractice? Corporations are not liable under malpractice standards. Sua \*\* [/QUOTE] Standards of care/protection are not only applicable to this type of civil suit. Corporations are sued many times a day in North America for not having met a standard, ie. not subcribing to “due diligence”. ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/45 "2001-10-25T19:10:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mary Hart’s Legs \* > Standards of care/protection are not only applicable to this type of civil suit. Corporations are sued many times a day in North America for not having met a standard, ie. not subcribing to “due diligence”. \*\* I know corporations are sued many times a day in North America - it is my job to sue them or defend them from lawsuits. Let me try this again - **you have no clue what you are talking about**. 1. I have open in front of me the Restatement (Second) of Torts (as you probably don’t know, neligence is a cause of action in tort). A review of the index reveals no references to “due” “diligence” or “due diligence”. 2. I am currently in the act of performing due diligence for a client. That entails looking through the records of a corporation they wish to purchase in an attempt to discern whether there are potential lawsuits against that corporation that will lessen the value of the corporation. Some of those potential lawsuits may be for negligence, but others may be for securities law issues, breach of contract, etc., etc. In all, **MHL** you do not know what you are talking about. Please, proceed with your citationless yammering about what corporate tools firefighters are. Please, stop your idiotic blathering about standards of care and negligence. Or, at the very least, read a book - this law stuff isn’t that hard. Sua ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/46 "2001-10-25T19:51:14Z")
Sua, this seems to be the equivalent of banging your head against a wall. **MHL** has indicated, again and again, by both words and actions that s/he has no intention of supporting any claims. It also seems to be evident that s/he picks and chooses what to respond to. This isn’t a debate and it never was. It was just a chance for **MHL** to get on a soapbox and pontificate about a subject which s\he has no knowledge, yet seems to have plenty of ‘expertise’. ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/47 "2001-10-25T20:19:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by adam yax \* > Sua, this seems to be the equivalent of banging your head against a wall. You call it head-banging, I call it bitch-slapping. (I’m trying to [[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=95188](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=95188)"]]( [url) help jarbabyj orgasm. ) Pu-TAY-to, po-TAH-to. Besides which, WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN? What if they come in here and read **MHL’s** drivel, without anyone there to say to them, “Listen, boys and girls, this is why you have to do your homework and read your books, so that you don’t end up like **Mary Hart’s Legs**.” I think **MHL** is performing a valuable public service as a negative example, and I have to do my part. 😃 Sua ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/48 "2001-10-25T20:27:37Z")
Fine, vB code. Ruin my joke. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=95188](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=95188) ---
**Author:** ![Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e19b73/32.png) [@Mary\_Hart\_s\_Legs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mary_Hart_s_Legs)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/49 "2001-10-25T20:40:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SuaSponte \* > > I know corporations are sued many times a day in North America - it is my job to sue them or defend them from lawsuits. Let me try this again - **you have no clue what you are talking about**. > > 1. I have open in front of me the Restatement (Second) of Torts (as you probably don’t know, neligence is a cause of action in tort). A review of the index reveals no references to “due” “diligence” or “due diligence”. > 2. I am currently in the act of performing due diligence for a client. That entails looking through the records of a corporation they wish to purchase in an attempt to discern whether there are potential lawsuits against that corporation that will lessen the value of the corporation. Some of those potential lawsuits may be for negligence, but others may be for securities law issues, breach of contract, etc., etc. > > In all, **MHL** you do not know what you are talking about. Please, proceed with your citationless yammering about what corporate tools firefighters are. Please, stop your idiotic blathering about standards of care and negligence. Or, at the very least, read a book - this law stuff isn’t that hard. For a corporate legal beagle, you’ve got a lot of time on your hands to “bitch slap” a “negative example”. I’m confused as to why someone of your vocation would have been stumped at which def’n of due diligence I was refering to- especially when the parties I used as an example were so clearly given. Go back to the books, Sua ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2001, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347/50 "2001-10-25T21:29:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mary Hart’s Legs \* > For a corporate legal beagle, you’ve got a lot of time on your hands to “bitch slap” a “negative example”. Oh, I’ll pay later on, when I’m stuck here late at night, but I’ve never believed in delayed gratification. > [@](#): > > I’m confused as to why someone of your vocation would have been stumped at which def’n of due diligence I was refering to- especially when the parties I used as an example were so clearly given. Let me try again, You wrote > [@](#): > > There should be no confusion here, as due diligence has a very precise legal meaning is our discussion. I responded that “due diligence” does not have such a precise legal meaning. In other words, “I do not think that word means what you think it means.” To give you some free legal education “due diligence” as it relates to the tort of negligence largely refers to the responsiblity of a party to perform a specified duty in a thorough and non-dilatory manner. Please note that the duty is specified (usually a fiduciary duty), not the general duty we all have to act a reasonably prudent persons in avoiding injury to another. If you need to know what “fiduciary duty” means, that will cost you. I bill at $295/hour. Sua [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/firefighters-guardians-of-corporate-welfare/89347.md?page=2)