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.
