What are your thoughts?
Board Lawyers
- Thread starter twenty02
- Start date
Good timing. I was just informed, 3 hours ago, by my new employer that I have to be in court next Tuesday to represent the company.
I asked, "why, whats the case, when did it happen, what did we do, what are they asking, who is "they" that is asking it"?
Answer: I don't know, just go rep us. ..
WTF?
I asked, "why, whats the case, when did it happen, what did we do, what are they asking, who is "they" that is asking it"?
Answer: I don't know, just go rep us. ..
WTF?
My thoughts are "Thanks Obama."
This slippery-slope of "use the government institutions as personal political weapons" started with the Obama IRS slow-walking conservative 501(c)(4) applications.
What could go wrong, eh?
Let me give the Democrat response: No one is above the law
There is a reason Ego Man tweets at night. Chronic bad conscience, chronic insomnia.
Well, he’s obviously just tearing out at those he believes (maybe justifiably, in some instances) have taken part in targeting him.
Personally, I’d rather see “loser pays” become the law of the land. You wanna piss lawyers off…mention those two words together.
Loser pays exists fairly often as is. By statute. Contract. Offer of judgment. Some are only costs but fla offer of judgment by way of example includes attny’s fees
A question.
Your kid is a victim of a botched diagnosis which leaves him with a severe learning disability. Your lawyer tells you you have a better than 50/50 chance to win the case, If you win, your kid will have enough funds to live, a relatively comfortable life. If you lose, and because this case would be very expensive, and you live in a loser pays state, you will be wiped out. College funds gone. Vacation savings gone. Your future would probably include a bankruptcy liquidation. All to pay a Doctor or his healthcare network money that for them is a drop in the bucket.
Do you pursue the case? Does your answer change if you are an odd job bum without a pot to pee in?
Loser pay laws don’t matter to very rich or very poor. The poor schlub who has worked to have a decent lifestyle gets screwed.
If I believe I have a solid case, of course I pursue it. And your first sentence implies I do - botched diagnosis, left him disabled.
But if my lawyer only thinks it’s a coin flip, then it probably isn’t all that solid of a case.
If the facts of the case are that there was (a) a botched diagnosis that (b) clearly left my son disabled, why would it only be a coin flip?
More realistic is that your kid is disabled that is likely the cause of med mal. But it’s not clear. That your kid is fckd is clear. But what transpired to leave him in that condition isn’t. You need more information. Lots more. And the acquisition of same comes at great expense. With obstacles. Whores. Caps. Obstacles stacked to the benefit of the defense bc they lobby. The likelihood of winning isn’t equal Fee shifting would reduce the already reduced numbers of p lawyers willing to invest their time and money on behalf of those less fortunate
Wonder why it’s gotten that way.
But if the causation isn’t clear, then there’s a reason it’s a coin flip. In his hypothetical, it was established as fact.
The difference is never the outliers. Where liability is clear from the onset. It’s where something really shitty happened that’s anomalous but you don’t know
Immigrant Mom presents to the ER claiming her water broke. Hospital says nah you’re just pissing yourself. Go home. Er only. Discharge doc one sheet. Drink fluids. Call if belly hurts.
Goes home. It’s actually premature rupture of membranes. “Dry” baby. After two days. Dead. But mom was uninsured and had minimal prenatal care. She also smoked during her pregnancy. And the baby might have been fckd up. But she wasn’t pissing. She had prom and shouldn’t have been sent home. She should have been admitted. A rich person at a rich hospital would have
That’s what you often get. Hospital fckd up. No idea what a jury will do. You want mom to pay?
You are avoiding the hard question.
Many experienced observers will say there is at least a 20% chance any case can go either way.
An injured patient will have solid experts about causation, prognosis, liability and future damages. Rest assured the doc will also have experts to refute all of it.
If the hospital fckd up, I don’t want the mom to pay.
What I do want is a much less litigious society than the one we have now…which IMO has been driven much more by lawyers seeking money than by any semblance of justice.
When just about every highway I drive on is flooded with billboards from these grifters, something clearly isn’t right. It’s costly to all of us - and it hasn’t always been this way.
If you have better ideas to curb this insanity that doesn’t deny your immigrant mom justice, I’m all ears. But I think raising the risk of filing a bs lawsuit seems like a pretty good antidote.
I think you really have to parse out the area as overgeneralizing doesn’t work. In the world of med mal claimants are grossly underrepresented. It’s rigged to benefit the defense.
The billboard shit I agree. That’s just a racket. Guy gets rear ended goin zero mph presents to urgent care then treats with a dirty chiro for three months and gets $5k. Dumb. Costs unnecessarily passed on to all of us. Tho that’s the central tenet of torts. Passing on. But there are remedies for that fact pattern. Some states have pip insurance. You file your shitty claim against ur own policy and get med bills and lost wages. No pain and suffering. Can’t go to court unless your injury is “permanent”
Some states do things better than others
I’m just using the facts you gave me.
You presented something that sounds like a slam dunk…but then threw in that the lawyer isn’t so sure.
Maybe there’s a reason it’s not a slam dunk?
Look, I have no issue with people being made whole when they’ve genuinely been wronged. None at all.
But when there’s a civil legal system that pays a guy (or his shyster lawyer) money for sticking his arm in a machine, something isn’t right.
And, no, there weren’t any details I’m leaving out that made that case any more meritorious than how I’m describing it. That’s pretty much the long and short of it.
And in any sane system, such a case would never have gotten off the ground. We don’t have a sane system.
You’re jaded by an anomalous case. An outlier. Comp is no fault but it can’t be intentional
Well, you said that med mal claims are subject to some kind of preliminary professional review before they’re even moved forward, right?
In that instance, I have no issues. But how often is that the case when we’re dealing with dumbasses thrusting their arms into powerful augurs that became jammed? Or all the auto related stuff you reference?
How do we make a system that is accessible for people who have perfectly legitimate claims and weed out all the bullshit for people (and lawyers) who really don’t…but figure they have a pretty good shot at a payday anyway?
I don’t think it’s an anomaly. Not at all.
And neither did our lawyers. They had plenty of stories of this kind of crap, mcmurtry.
Everybody involved knew what the game was. And they’d all played it multiple times. They were after a nuisance settlement…and they got it (and not just from us).
We need to do better. If you truly care for the system, folks like you would be well served to take out the garbage. But you guys don’t. You defend it, excuse it, talk at me like I’m pursuing injustice, etc.
At one time I headed a department with over 5,000 cases. One the lady had an injury from the war that she tried to claim was work related. I saw soft tissue bs all the time. A couple questionable slip and dives. But again I could count them all on one hand. Exceedingly rare
My friends and I got out. My partners are all lawyers. We don’t think it’s a calling or anything like coh etc. Cortez on the board and our crowd of lawyer buds have talked all day everyday by text for 25 plus years. Of our entire group one practices law. All of us got out. Not worth the aggravation.
Well, clearly, plenty of others keep soldiering on throwing whatever crap they can get their hands on against the wall if they think there’s a chance they can get some to stick.
And we need to do a better job weeding out the crap. Personally, I think raising the cost of bringing forth crap would be a good way to get less crap.
Anyway….do I get a QED on triggering lawyers by merely saying the words “loser pays”?
I should also add, re: our lawyers…
I’m well aware that their incentive here is also for the thing to keep carrying on. They may be nominally representing us, but their job is still to bring in dollars for their firms. At least, that’s what I would be demanding of them if I was running their firm.
As the old saying goes….in a small town, one lawyer can’t make a living. But two can.
Love it lol. Any time you get a hard on for lawyers remember many are totally miserable. Dealing with people at their worstWell, clearly, plenty of others keep soldiering on throwing whatever crap they can get their hands on against the wall if they think there’s a chance they can get some to stick.
And we need to do a better job weeding out the crap. Personally, I think raising the cost of bringing forth crap would be a good way to get less crap.
Anyway….do I get a QED on triggering lawyers by merely saying the words “loser pays”?
I’m sure. I don’t think it’s something I’d want to be dealing with, that’s for sure.
The irony of me saying all this is that we have two firms we deal with. One primary contact at each, and numerous others we deal with in specific instances…depending on the nature of the matter at hand. Contracts, labor, regulatory, estate planning, etc.
And I’m actually quite fond of the ones we regularly use. But the ones I’ve dealt with from Lawsuit, Inc? Not a fan.
I liked being in court. And the paralegals. And happy hour. The rest. Hell
PPS…
There are also a helluva lot of grifters in my industry. And I’m not just talking about the fly-by-night one man and a truck contractors. I swim with absolute sharks who will screw you as soon as look at you.
As a general rule, every construction project is a competition between everybody involved. Every project has a budget (which may or may not be fluid), and there isn’t a concerned party who isn’t trying to walk away with every dollar they can.
That includes owners, lenders, designers, general contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and every guy wearing a hard hat…and it doesn’t stop there.
These things aren’t collaborations so much as competitions. And if you aren’t completely on your game, you can easily walk away as one of the losers.
There are also a helluva lot of grifters in my industry. And I’m not just talking about the fly-by-night one man and a truck contractors. I swim with absolute sharks who will screw you as soon as look at you.
As a general rule, every construction project is a competition between everybody involved. Every project has a budget (which may or may not be fluid), and there isn’t a concerned party who isn’t trying to walk away with every dollar they can.
That includes owners, lenders, designers, general contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and every guy wearing a hard hat…and it doesn’t stop there.
These things aren’t collaborations so much as competitions. And if you aren’t completely on your game, you can easily walk away as one of the losers.
Whatever. The point is loser pay laws screw the middle class by inhibiting their access to jury trials. The rich and the poor don’t give a damn.
Crazed likes winding us up. ****er. He used twenty’s post as a jumping off point to poke us again
I think we've had this conversation before, but I'm pretty sure you relish that private firms are driven by "seeking money" over other things in other areas of the economy.
I would assume any 'slam dunk' would be settled by the insurance company ASAP. Assuming it's a covered claim
Similar threads
