They have to do that because from several angles, that thing looks like a Kia.

Ooooooohhhh. That explains why none of my complaints to the help department about the infinitely scrolling articles are yielding results.

Stef: I notice that it is only a motion for partial summary judgement. What survives if this is granted? Any hope of linking the memo of law that the parents filed with this motion paperwork?

Are there fee shifting provisions in New York state for alleged intentional torts?

Bah! Just give us a land cruiser size FJ-40:

OK Canadian legal folk: do the purchasers Alain and Valerie have a claim against the former owners for misrepresenting the property?

In some US jurisdictions, the adversely possessed property changes ownership by operation, and then you can file an action to have the title changed, so the former owners would be liable…

What’s wrong with a face without a nose?

Love the Gleaming the Cube reference. Not sure how I missed that the first time.

Not even close to true. So much can go wrong on a jump approach that leads to not getting the height you need, from a flat tire to engine cutting out because of a fuel problem. You hope it doesn’t happen, but it is totally possible he and/or the bike land on the road and/or someone’s vehicle.

Ideally, everyone would live in the burbs and each person would have their own small car for daily stuff, a SUV for weekend warrior stuff / group outings, and a pickup truck for projects. So, a person should have 3 cars.

But I don’t have room for 3 cars, so I have to choose just one. A larger car that doesn’t does…

Almost no one is talking about it, but this trend is because of “stroller-bloat” that has been happening over the past 10 years.

100% Agree. This thing isn’t bad, per se (I kind of like the look, and think it could be a fun California summer car) BUT it should be a re-bodied Range, or similar, with some reproduction Bronco body panels fit onto it, and it should be $3000-$5000.

Anyone else look at this and think “Uh oh, here comes Rule 34.” ?

There’s a pretty apparent design defect for the manufacturer of the automated system when it doesn’t shut down if a car stops moving for any reason. Stalled, wedged on the track, whatever, there should be a check that the space is empty before it tries to move a car into that space.

There’s an assumption here: kid dies the first year, but because they started classes, mom and dad don’t get a tuition refund.

Normally I like cars that are an answer to a question no one asked, but these are kind of unforgivable. Like they were chasing the Accord Crosstour market or something.

Quick advice for next time:
- Go into the office, explain situation, that he threatened to fight you.
- Try and get him kicked off the lot.
- If it works, go take the four tires he previously harvested for himself.
- Hope he isn’t waiting for you in the parking lot.

Well, only how the guy ended up out of the plane before the crash is an assumption. But even so, this is hardly the “Weirdest Mystery of 2017" based on the facts so far. Add “...and the aircraft’s cabin doors were still locked...from the inside!” and you might have something.

Am I missing something here? The guy set the autopilot and bailed / jumped / fell out. Plane ran out of gas. Everything seems explained on how the plane ended up in the snow.