Comics - Off To The Races #12 - June 5th, 2017, 12:00 pm

Average Rating 5.00

The hat IS pretty unforgivable...

Author Comments:

DarkwingDork, June 5th, 2017, 10:22 am ( Reply )

- So, the track owner decides to pull a fast one, and the lawyers aren't having it. Technically, he *could* have gotten away with it (the flier's disclaimer laid that out pretty well) but he made a faux pas about confessing to negligence, so it's best to pay out.

Post A Comment

Reader Comments:

  checks and valences... ( Reply )

Between Jock the jack(ass) and the crooked man who drives a crooked bargain, can we Centaurs EVER see justice done? (Thanks, Cubist!)

posted by Centaur71 (Guest) on June 5th, 2017, 2:32 pm

( Reply )

Oh noez... lawyers! Truly the scariest of all monsters.

posted by Salen on June 5th, 2017, 4:05 pm

  ( Reply )

Can't be too careful when you're dealing with the greedy people.

posted by Night-X (Guest) on June 5th, 2017, 4:20 pm

( Reply )

@Salen: "They mostly come out for tort. Mostly."

posted by DarkwingDork on June 5th, 2017, 4:28 pm

  ( Reply )

Yay! We got to see Cubist pull off the trollface!

posted by Midday Mew (Guest) on June 5th, 2017, 10:43 pm

  Worse than PETA ( Reply )

It is worse than PETA; it is LAWYERS!!!

posted by Old Crow on June 7th, 2017, 10:13 pm

( Reply )

Of course, a certain Badger might also be helpful in this case... 7@=Q

posted by Lucius Appaloosius on June 12th, 2017, 3:04 am

  ( Reply )

Does seem weird these lawyers are wearing sunglasses. It makes me wonder if these lawyers are the real MIB lawyers?

posted by Night-X (Guest) on June 12th, 2017, 11:21 am

  Not very good lawyers ( Reply )

It's illegal to record someone without their knowledge or consent.

posted by Annoyinguynonelikes (Guest) on December 3rd, 2017, 8:50 pm

( Reply )

@Annoyinguynonelikes: Not when you're out in public. Supreme Court says you have no expectation of privacy once you step out your front door.

posted by DarkwingDork on December 3rd, 2017, 9:27 pm

  ( Reply )

@Annoyinguynonelikes: Not necessarily. Depending on the jurisdiction, it may be enough for just one of the parties to have given their consent—google "one-party consent" for details.

posted by Guest on December 3rd, 2017, 9:35 pm

Post A Comment