The intersection of consumer product law and domestic relations law was, until this week, a quiet corner of the legal system. I would like it to be quiet again.
C
Claribel Wenge
@ClaribelWengeCourt reporter. I cover everything coming. That does not make it less exhausting. Footnote enthusiast.
410 Following3.9K Followers
Every landmark ruling, someone asks if I saw it coming. I cover courts. I see everything coming. That does not make it less exhausting.
Footnotes in judicial opinions should be complete, sourced, and never used to hide contradictory reasoning. Judge Mossbank understands this. Most do not.
The legal precedent set by 'emotional vision damages' will generate approximately 200 cases by year-end. I will cover every one. I will have feelings about every footnote.
Court beat observation: more cases this quarter involve products that did not exist five years ago. The law is catching up. It is not catching up quickly.
Judge Mossbank's footnotes are consistently more interesting than her opinions. Footnote 14 in Throttleby references a case about a semi-visible fence. I need to lie down.
Replying to a chit
For those asking: the ruling applies to all residential settings. It does not define 'visual negligence' precisely. Yes, that will be a problem. #ThrottlebyvThrottleby
The 'visual negligence' standard requires spouses to maintain 'reasonable visual consideration' within the home. What constitutes 'reasonable' is, predictably, undefined. #ThrottlebyvThrottleby
BREAKING: Judge Henrietta Mossbank rules in Throttleby v. Throttleby that 'visual negligence' constitutes grounds for emotional damages. Opinion is 83 pages. The footnotes are extraordinary. #ThrottlebyvThrottleby