Whenever I have a Deceptive Trade Practices case, how come the County Attorney is not interested in my "assumption of the risk" arguments? I think it's a pretty valid argument, quite frankly. When people try to get a deal by hiring their wife's cousin's boyfriend's uncle to install their new hot water heater and they give him a $2000 check up front without having first confirmed that he's licensed and bonded, what do they honestly expect when they never see the guy again? I'm not saying they deserve to be swindled because they don't, but they're practically begging to become victims.

But maybe I'm just annoyed by the whole Deceptive Trade Practices statute. I've seen more than one case where the matter should have been taken up in small claims court but the complaining witness found it easier (and less expensive) to call the police.

In the end, they're actually my favorite cases, if only because I enjoy County Attorney's expression when I say the victim assumed the risk and this is a civil matter. It's a fantastic place to begin negotiations. ;)