They were only 30 feet apart. 10 yards.  And he didn't see him? [Well, it is 
inconceivable, Sprague's great email to the contrary notwithstanding, that 
Cheney intended to shoot the lawyer. But . . .  .]

I almost shot my sister once in a similar situation while hunting in my 
misspent youth in Oklahoma and thereafter decided that hunting was too 
dangerous for people who liked living. But I feel the same way about 
skydiving, underwater cave diving and other high risk behaviors. The wimp 
factor, of course, but I'd like to die at 95 from laughing too hard.

Ginny


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael O'Hara" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: Cheyney shoots fellow hunter


>      If I heard the facts correctly and the facts were reported correctly,
> this might be a contributory negligence situation where the plaintiff's 
> own
> negligence is so great as to bar suit.
>
>      Bird hunters use a protocol to minimize this very predictable and
> recognized dangerous error.  For example, hunt while walking in a inverted
> V with the lead hunter only shooting straight ahead and the sides only
> shooting to towards their side of the inverted V.
>
>      The injured person exited the V looking for a potentially downed
> bird.  That is quite normal, but it does increase the duties of all
> involved to know the location of all involved.  The V changed direction of
> walking.  That is quite normal, but "not good" when a member has left the 
> V
> unless the change in direction was away from the missing member.  The V
> moved away from the missing member.  All are thus taking on additional
> duties to know dynamically changing locations.  (The best suit is against
> the Secret Service member who is licensed bird hunter as the superior
> knowledge of both the body guard and the hunter come into play, and 
> members
> of the V do have a duty to rescue.)  The person who left the V changed
> directions of walking.  Again, "not good" if the change is towards the
> moving V.  However, when the missing member changes directions as well as
> when the V changes directions both are obligated to vocalize the change 
> and
> obtain a vocalized confirmation.  (In the real word this often is not
> done.)  Especially bad was the lack of vocalization of the missing 
> member's
> change of direction (e.g. contributory negligence).  The combination of 
> the
> walking V and the missing member in the brush flushed a bird on Cheyney's
> side of V and Cheyney rotated towards the flush, firing at sound with a
> necessarily very narrow field of vision (i.e., end of barrel).
>
>      This sport requires conditioned reflexes that operate within the zone
> of feasible physical action predominantly prior to deliberate cognition
> (e.g., recall VP Quayle's endangered quail).  As one ages the microseconds
> defining the zone of feasible physical action prior to deliberate 
> cognition
> increases.  The hunter can still hit the bird, but the hunter can not 
> "see"
> the context of the bird.
>
>      Cheney is liable for the inappropriate discharge  Cheney could be
> liable for not stopping hunting after his age would not let him limit his
> shot selection to safe shots.  The injured hunter is liable for not
> vocalizing (and Cheney is liable for not noticing the unvocalized change 
> of
> direction and for not obtaining a vocalized confirmation of the V's change
> of direction).
>
>      Not to be unkind, but the pre-injury photograph of the injured hunter
> could support an inference of a work life expectancy of relatively few
> years.  While Cheney might be liable, the primary damages are likely to be
> medical expenses, especially after, at a minimum, off setting the injured
> hunter's own negligence.
>
> Michael
>
> Professor Michael J. O'Hara, J.D., Ph.D.
> Finance, Banking, & Law Department        Editor, Journal of Legal
> Economics
> College of Business Administration        (402) 554 - 2014 voice fax (402)
> 554 - 3825
> Roskens Hall 502                    www.AAEFE.org
> University of Nebraska at Omaha           www.JournalOfLegalEconomics.com
> Omaha  NE  68182
> [log in to unmask]
> (402) 554 - 2823 voice  fax (402) 554 - 2680
> http://cba.unomaha.edu/faculty/mohara/web/ohara.htm
>