About this site

  • Comments
    When you submit a comment, it won't be published until approved. This is to cut down on comment spam. However, I will also edit or block comments that are profane or offensive.
  • No Legal Advice
    Although I may from time to time discuss legal issues on this blog, nothing that I post should be construed as legal advice, nor as creating an attorney-client relationship between you and me. In fact, there's a good chance I'm not licensed to practice law wherever you are. If you need legal advice, you should consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
  • Personal View
    This blog is neither affiliated with my employer nor hosted by it. It is maintained through TypePad, and I pay the hosting fees. Nothing that is posted here should be construed as anything other than the views of the particular author of the post.
  • Tung Yin's Recent Papers (SSRN)

April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Stats


  • Check Google Page Rank

« Hollywood time-space physics and other thoughts about "24" | Main | Now reading "Anonymous Lawyer" »

May 30, 2006

Comments

Travis

This weekend I ate at a Hawaiian restaurant here in San Jose. It's not an upscale place, but it's not fast food either. The service was less than impressive: I fetched my own menus, and we had to wait a while for water, and ask for our waitress to take our orders. On the other hand, the food came quickly enough, and our sodas were refilled promptly. When the bill came, we weren't charged for the two sodas. I did not point this out. But despite the marginal service, I tipped my normal 17% (sales tax doubled). I didn't lose sleep over the "free" sodas. In my business, if I forget to bill for services I render, I don't expect my customers to voluntarily cut me a check. Similarly, I don't feel obligated to audit a restaurant tab for possible omissions. To me, this falls under "you snooze, you lose".

Ted

Actually, I believe some states have an ethical rule requiring the return of inadvertently produced attorney-client privileged documents. And where they don't, it's typically written into protective orders in cases where discovery obligations are symmetrical. (In individual v. corporation suits, the smaller party has much less incentive to agree to rules that reduce the cost of discovery screening by the larger party.)

The comments to this entry are closed.