I respond to a letter by Harry Steinberg, "§240 Has Been Stretched Beyond Breaking Point," Nov. 16), which commented on my Nov. 14 column, "The Myth of the Intoxicated But Victorious Plaintiff."
Much of Steinberg's letter deals not with the subject of my column, but with me. He is correct to the extent he posits that the public policy implications of the Labor Law, and the question of whether it needs to be "reformed," are matters of public interest as to which people can and will disagree. That said, by focusing on the messenger rather than the message, he fails to disprove anything I actually said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
