-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em! From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com) Thu Jul 28 07:46:30 2005 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: art fougner, md: "Re: EMTALA" Previous message: art fougner, md: "Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em!" In reply to: DoctorJoe@aol.com: "Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em!" Next in thread: ainsron: "Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em!" Joe Yet the NJ Supreme Court felt that access to the ocean could not be restricted ... perhaps this might be extended to Anna's river? Court opens private N.J. beach to all Advocates of public access say ruling could ripple all along Shore Wednesday, July 27, 2005 BY TOM FEENEY Star-Ledger Staff The public's right to enjoy the beach extends from the surf to the dry sand above it, even if that sand is privately owned, the state Supreme Court ruled yesterday in a landmark beach-access case. The state's highest court ruled the owner of the private Atlantis Beach Club in Lower Township, Cape May County, must allow anyone willing to pay $3 for a daily beach badge to have full access to the beach, from the mean high-tide line back to the dunes. It was the first beach-access case to reach the court in 21 years, and though the ruling stemmed from a case involving one private club at the southern tip of New Jersey, advocates and lawyers said it could change the way private beaches all along the state's 127-mile coastline are used by the public. ..."The ruling makes clear that all private beach owners have to make a reasonable amount of the dry sand beach available to the public," said Assistant Attorney General Stephanie Brand, who argued for the state in favor of greater public access. http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1122442385258600.xml&coll=1 Surely the ocean would be more of an "attractive nuisance" than a river. art At Wed, 27 Jul 2005, DoctorJoe@aol.com wrote: > >In a message dated 7/27/05 8:44:56 PM, annam@uic.edu writes: > >> A lawyer here in Illinois had the audacity to call the river that runs >> through our town an "attractive nuisance" (direct quote from the local >> paper). A 9-year-old boy was allowed to go to the library without an >> adult and decided to go out the back door and across the parking lot to >> play on the edge of the river, where he fell in and drowned. Now his >> mom is suing the city and the library for not fencing off the RIVER. >> >Legally, an attractive nuisance is any inherently hazardous object or >condition of property that can be expected to attract children to investiga e or play >(for example, construction sites and discarded large appliances). The >doctrine imposes upon the property owner either the duty to take precaution that are >reasonable in light of the normal behavior of young children--a much higher >degree of care than required toward adults--or the same care as that owed t >"invitees"--a higher standard than required toward uninvited, casual visito s >(licensees). > >So the question here would be, did the city (?) "build up" around the river >to make it an attractive nuisance to kids like this, or does the river run >through in its natural state? Generally, when you go out of your way to dev lop >something, you become more liable for whatever happens there. > >Joe P. -- art fougner, md "If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else." Lawrence Peter Berra Next message: art fougner, md: "Re: EMTALA" Previous message: art fougner, md: "Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em!" In reply to: DoctorJoe@aol.com: "Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em!" Next in thread: ainsron: "Re: Not Ob/Gyn: Lawyers! Gotta luv 'em!"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Fri May 2 04:41:28 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.