To: "SEAOC Newsletter" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: Ethical Responsibility?
From: Christopher Wright <chrisw(--nospam--at)skypoint.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 01 12:36:23 -0500
>Arnold Bookbinder let a strong campaign to change the laws that protect
>information accumulated while under the employ of an attorney as an
If I recall correctly, the privacy issue applies to attorney-client
privelege and means that the attorney needn't divulge what he doesn't
want to. The engineer's files can always be subpoenaed, if someone needs
what's there. In fact I've been subpoened in a couple of instances where
opposing counsel wanted to make sure I would testify, even if my client
As far as the safety hazard is concerned, I'd make damn sure there was a
real demonstrable safety hazard before I did anything rash. By
demonstrable, I mean with hard (like photographic) evidence that the
bridge is in a dangerous condition. If the balloon does go up, and there
are proceedings the standard of judgement on Bill would be that he knew,
to a reasonable scientific certainty, that the bridge was dangerous and
defective. A couple of Code violations or damaged paint won't do it.
Damn. I swore I'd never get into another guardhouse lawyer thread, but
it's so much fun...
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant from
chrisw(--nospam--at)skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
___________________________| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org