0

I have a question about my Law Stack Exchange post: Even if the 5th party is suing the 4th, wouldn't 4th and 5th parties' arguments that 3rd party broke the chain of causation be identical?

Dale M should NOT have deleted If D1 can't sue D2, then wouldn't D1 and D2 argue identically that D3 broke the chain of causation? Why not? Because Dale M does not appear to have carefully read both questions, which are distinguishable. In the deleted question, the 5th party is barred from suing the 4th because the 4th is bankrupt. Thus the 5th party's Statement of Defence shall necessarily differ for these two separate questions.

Rick commented

Do you know you posted this twice?

Alas, Rick too did not carefully read, and distinguish, both questions.

3
  • 1
    I must agree this is not a duplicate. even if it were, duplicates are normally closed, not deleted, but this should be undeleted. Since it was deleted by a mod, non-mods cannot vote to undelete it.
    – David Siegel
    Commented Aug 8, 2022 at 1:06
  • 1
    @DavidSiegel "even if it were, duplicates are normally closed, not deleted". I agree. SE either keeps playing a blind eye on this mod's persistent abuse of his privileges, or any steps taken to address this issue are proving ineffective.
    – Iñaki Viggers
    Commented Aug 9, 2022 at 20:02
  • 2
    @Iñaki Viggers To be fair, if one thought that the 2nd question was an accidental repeat post, deletion would perhaps have been proper. But in fact it was not such an accident..
    – David Siegel
    Commented Aug 9, 2022 at 21:13

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

At the time Dale deleted the question, they looked like 1 (requires ability to see deleted posts) and 2. These are really asking the same question: would the 4th and 5th parties' arguments that 3rd party broke the chain of causation be identical?

You could probably have combined the questions, as written at the time, with a simple "Would this change if D1 was a billionaire and D2's net worth were so trivial as to make them not worth suing?"

Even so, as David Siegel points out in the comments, if I'm correct that this was a duplicate (and I'm only assessing at the time of deletion, not with your subsequent edits), it should have been closed as a duplicate (with a note similar to my second paragraph) instead of being deleted. That way, you would have the opportunity to differentiate the questions and have the community review the changes, while still removing it eventually if the issues is not addressed.

2
  • 1
    I think (and said) that the two questions were not duplicates, and should not have been either closed or deleted. I am about ready to repost the deleted question.
    – David Siegel
    Commented Aug 9, 2022 at 21:09
  • 1
    @DavidSiegel apologies, I had intended to convey that you'd meant that if it were a duplicate, it should have been closed rather than deleted. I've edited my answer to try to clarify that. Basically, I'm trying to say that regardless of whether it is or was a duplicate, we're in agreement that it should not have been deleted.
    – Ryan M
    Commented Aug 9, 2022 at 21:20

You must log in to answer this question.