The answers posted by me in internet newsgroups, message boards and websites may not and must not be relied on as legal advice because:
1. In most cases I don't know what state or country the person with the question or comment (poster) is in, and therefore I cannot know what laws apply.
2. Even if I know what country and state the poster is in, it is unlikely that I will know anything about the laws of that country or state.
3. I am sometimes able to give general, academic answers in areas of law that I know something about because the questions are sometimes basic. But general, academic answers are good for educational and discussion purposes only and are not reliable when applied to real situations.
4. I answer only the questions that are asked. The poster and I have only limited opportunity to ask follow-up questions of each other, so I do not expand the answer to include discussion of questions that would have been or should have been asked if we were talking face to face.
5. I rely on the facts as posted in the question. I have no opportunity to investigate the facts or evaluate the truthfulness of the person who posted the facts behind the question. I have only limited opportunity to inquire about the views on the other side in the dispute.
6. I have only limited opportunity to examine the poster’s documents pertaining to the question. Even though it is technically possible for a poster to post a contract or other document, I have only limited ability to inquire about correspondence and conversations leading up to or interpreting the document.
7. The only value anyone can derive from my answers is (a) direction to the legal issues that I think apply to the facts posted, (b) improved ability to do research into the laws of the poster's state or country and (c) improved ability to ask questions of the poster's attorney. My answers have no value as, and must not be relied on as legal advice.
McGyver
1. In most cases I don't know what state or country the person with the question or comment (poster) is in, and therefore I cannot know what laws apply.
2. Even if I know what country and state the poster is in, it is unlikely that I will know anything about the laws of that country or state.
3. I am sometimes able to give general, academic answers in areas of law that I know something about because the questions are sometimes basic. But general, academic answers are good for educational and discussion purposes only and are not reliable when applied to real situations.
4. I answer only the questions that are asked. The poster and I have only limited opportunity to ask follow-up questions of each other, so I do not expand the answer to include discussion of questions that would have been or should have been asked if we were talking face to face.
5. I rely on the facts as posted in the question. I have no opportunity to investigate the facts or evaluate the truthfulness of the person who posted the facts behind the question. I have only limited opportunity to inquire about the views on the other side in the dispute.
6. I have only limited opportunity to examine the poster’s documents pertaining to the question. Even though it is technically possible for a poster to post a contract or other document, I have only limited ability to inquire about correspondence and conversations leading up to or interpreting the document.
7. The only value anyone can derive from my answers is (a) direction to the legal issues that I think apply to the facts posted, (b) improved ability to do research into the laws of the poster's state or country and (c) improved ability to ask questions of the poster's attorney. My answers have no value as, and must not be relied on as legal advice.
McGyver
posted by McGyver | 6:39 AM
|
6 comments
