Another hmm… post

While anggarrgoon is usually a blog confined largely to linguistics, this is so amazing that I had to share. I was reading through my apartment lease at the weekend before signing and renewing it, and there was a new addendum to the contract. It was in relation to the “fitness center” in the complex. The addendum stated that I understood that exercise could result in delayed muscle soreness (amongst other things)  and that I absolved the apartment complex from all liability in this regard. This seems to mean that I promise not to sue my landlord if I get stiff after lifting weights. I’ll leave you to ponder the state of the world under which my landlord could think that they might be held responsible for a chemical reaction in their tenants’ muscles…


5 responses to “Another hmm… post

  1. Delayed muscle soreness looks like a good translation for German Muskelkater (literally muscle hangover).

  2. That’s pretty… stupid. In so many ways. Are you still in the US? If so, feel free to disregard — they can’t block you from bringing suit against them with a clause like that. Unfortunately you can’t sue them for being corporate turds, either.

    (Dunno if you remember me — fellow obscure-language grad student at Veritas U. and residence hall neighbor, now a grant/contract negotiator for fun & profit. Just came across your blog last week; great to see all the stuff you’ve been doing!)

  3. Yep, still in the US. Good to hear from you!
    I’m not worried about whether or not I can still sue, I’m just boggled at the idea that someone would think I might want to. I mean, if I ran up the 7 flights of stairs to my apartment fast after a run and that anaerobic exercise caused extra lactic acid buildup in my quads, can I sue in that case? It’s not covered by the addendum…

  4. Look at it this way: your landlord used a lawyer to check or write the contract. The lawyer put in that language in order to show your landlord that he was adding value, not just being an expensive pain. It’s called marketing.

  5. I wouldn’t disagree with Gary, but also think that a significant motivation for including language like this is blanket dissuasion, or intimidation if you like — planting the idea in tenants’ heads that they can’t sue for injuries (or that if they do, their suit’ll be dismissed). The stupidity of the language in question can make it seem all the more serious to a law-unsavvy tenant, while not being so egregious that real lawyers (or judges for that matter) will raise a fuss.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s