Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/2/2002 8:06:56 AM EDT
[url]http://www.msnbc.com/local/PISEA/68809.asp[/url] Does anyone else feel that these kinds of scum-sucking lawyers are out of control?
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 8:22:41 AM EDT
It is just another version of the lottery.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 8:42:38 AM EDT
"Scum sucking lawyers?" Please. How about gullible juries that rubber stamp every assenine request for ungodly amounts of cash? All the lawyer does is ask for money, it's the 12 in the box that write the check, with someone else's money.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 8:49:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87: All the lawyer does is ask for money, it's the 12 in the box that write the check, with someone else's money.
View Quote
So you're saying that the jury gets all the facts? There will never be real tort reform in this country because our legislators are [b]all lawyers.[/b] They know that if they ever get ridden out of Washington or their respective state capitals on a rail, they can always go back to suing the tobacco companies, pharmaceutical companies, etc for their daily bread. Why would they cut their own throats with tort reform?
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 8:55:58 AM EDT
No, the jury certainly doesn't get all the facts, but there are some areas of the country (like NYC) that civil litigators love because of the huge jury awards. That being said, I believe the average civil award has been decreasing this past decade. The only time you ever hear about an award is when it is a big one. You don't hear about the thousands that are dismissed or result in a nominal award.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 9:24:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87: "Scum sucking lawyers?" Please. How about gullible juries that rubber stamp every assenine request for ungodly amounts of cash? All the lawyer does is ask for money, it's the 12 in the box that write the check, with someone else's money.
View Quote
Yes, as I said: "THESE KINDS of scum-sucking lawyers" Not a blanket statement about lawyers, only the ones that make a career out of frivelous, class-action type suits. They are a unique breed that I have to believe draws contempt even from their own colleagues. And yes, it is the jury that awards the check. But, somebody has to ask them to do it. Its this type of lawyer that takes advantage of the situation to get rich.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 10:30:54 AM EDT
Lawyers provide a valuable service... without lawyers I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have lawyers. It's a necessary evil. Lawdog
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 10:50:56 AM EDT
Maybe the jury isn't all that dumb. As a cynical friend put it, juries (as well as the plaintiff) see it as an easy way to get money. If they rule in favor of the plaintiff, they could be setting precedence for their own ruling in some future litigation. But the question was: Why do people sue? I think they sue for the same fundamental reason of many of our problems. No one is at fault! It's never their own fault. And if it's not their own fault, then someone else should pay. More and more people simply refuse to take responsibility for their actions or stupidity. Unfortunately, this includes gun owners. There's a guy who returned a shipment of ammo which was delivered in good condition (new) and was mad because the vendor charged him shipping. The shipping would've been free had he kept the ammo.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 10:52:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By lawdog: Lawyers provide a valuable service... without lawyers I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have lawyers. It's a necessary evil.
View Quote
"Assault weapon bans provide a valuable service... without assault weapon bans I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have assault weapon bans. It's a necessary evil," said the ATF agent. All lawsuits for more than a reasonable amount, say $5000, should have to pass the "smell test" by a panel of five elected non-lawyers before it's filed. Any suits that don't pass would result in a fine to the plaintiff and a fine to the lawyer who filed it, as well as a complaint to the bar (lawyer protection) association. Five complaints and a a lawyer loses his license.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 10:57:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
Originally Posted By lawdog: Lawyers provide a valuable service... without lawyers I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have lawyers. It's a necessary evil.
View Quote
"Assault weapon bans provide a valuable service... without assault weapon bans I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have assault weapon bans. It's a necessary evil," said the ATF agent. All lawsuits for more than a reasonable amount, say $5000, should have to pass the "smell test" by a panel of five elected non-lawyers before it's filed. Any suits that don't pass would result in a fine to the plaintiff and a fine to the lawyer who filed it, as well as a complaint to the bar (lawyer protection) association. Five complaints and a a lawyer loses his license.
View Quote
I'll second that.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 11:04:10 AM EDT
I think the problem is this. Too many lawyers. Millions go to law school to make Mommy happy with the delusion they will wear suits and work in high profile firms like seen in L.A. Law. They believe six to seven figure salaries will be the norm. The reality is they graduate with few prospects and a flood of competetion. And with massive student loans. They soon realize lawyers are a dime a dozen. In a effort to eat and pay their student loans they will take any case no matter how loathsome. They will chase ambulances, sue their own mother and particiapte in any feeding frenzy. Add the missing ingredient of some shitbag liberal who believe it is somebody elses responsibility to provide his personal protection and happiness that happens to walk across your yard and trip. Instant lawsuit.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 11:43:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By lawdog: Lawyers provide a valuable service... without lawyers I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have lawyers. It's a necessary evil.
View Quote
Crack cocaine provides a valuable service... without crack I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have crack. It's a necessary evil. -- Crack Dealer Crack cocaine provides a valuable service... without crack I wouldn't have a pay check and my family would go hungry and have to live in the poor house. Gotta have crack. It's a necessary evil. -- DEA Agent
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 12:03:42 PM EDT
LMAO.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 12:18:31 PM EDT
Yup, When your child slips on the courthouse steps where some "scumbag" lawyer emptied his bowels; cracks their head open and suffers brain damage, You'll be shouting "TORT REFORM!"
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 12:54:11 PM EDT
You're driving down a road and come around a curve. In the middle of the road are a snake that's been run over, and a lawyer that's been run over. What's the difference between the two? A) There's skidmarks before the snake. Why don't sharks attack lawyers? A) Professional courtesy. You're taken to a room, and in the room are a lawyer, Saddam Hussein and Yassar Arafat. You're given a gun with two rounds in it. Who do you shoot first? A) The lawyer, TWICE. [pistol] This is a profession that has brought scorn upon itself, and are deserving of the abuse heaped upon them.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 12:58:40 PM EDT
All lawsuits for more than a reasonable amount, say $5000, should have to pass the "smell test" by a panel of five elected non-lawyers before it's filed.
View Quote
I disagree with the above. If you have a complaint, it should be heard. The guys with no rightful claim, but expensive lawyers, will probably make it past the panel anyway. I'm afraid the "little guy" might not be so lucky. My problem with the system is how much it costs to get out of a frivolous suit. I was sued about five years ago, because a company about 30 miles away mistook me for a former employee of theirs named Zachary Wilson. By the time my lawyer filed for a change of venue (they didn't sue me in the county I live in), answered about 200 pages of their discovery motions, filed a counter-claim that I had never worked for the company, answered all of their annoying followup "interrogatories", paid $1 per page for copies from my lawyer, paid for many FedEx delivered letters, handled claims that the documents I provided had been "shuffled" (order of pages changed), filed a counter-claim for my legal fees, etc., I had over a $7,000 legal bill. I've got money in an IRA and a trust that I don't want to touch (or can't w/o a large penalty), and that wiped-out almost every bit of free cash I had. The crooks that sued me wanted $100,000 in actual damages and $300,000 in punitive damages for what their former employee did. I hated wasting $7K, but when someone represented by one of the top law firms in the state sues you for $400K, you have to defend yourself. If the system worked, I should have just been able to go before a judge, sworn-in, shown that my name wasn't Zachary, and left. Instead, you have to answer all of the claims, no matter how idiotic, of the other party.z
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:01:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:05:48 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:19:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:31:22 PM EDT
Yet, if you go to the Nursery at any Hospital this afternoon and find a set of happy grandparents and a smiling new Dad, looking in and cooing at little Jr., in his little crib, ask them what they want him to be when he grows up? [b]A Lawyer! A Doctor![/b] Wait a minute, folks! Those are the two professions with the least amount of public respect! Why would you want him to grow up to be one of them? Ah, but our little boy, Jr., will be different! He won't be like those other ones. And insofar as a claim having to pass the smell test, what should a lawyer have told Mrs. Brown when she tried to enroll her black daughter in an all-white school in Kansas back in 1953? And then sued to get court approval? Sorry, Mrs. Brown, but we'll never be able to get five white citizens on a panel who will vote to permit you to proceed with your case! Eric The(LiveAndLetLive,LetTheDevilTakeTheHindmost­!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:38:25 PM EDT
Wayull shucks!! I guess y'all are right. The system is great the way it is. Silly me for considering a plan to possibly avoid the kind of lawsuit zoom was bitching about having to pay so much for after saying every complaint should be heard. I did notice that there were a lot of folks ripping my plan, but no one proposing an alternate plan. It couldn't be that those folks are making their house payments on the present system, could it? Naah. Couldn't be.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 1:56:39 PM EDT
You guys crack me up !!!! That bit on crack is funny!! Lawdog
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 2:14:39 PM EDT
Silly me for considering a plan to possibly avoid the kind of lawsuit zoom was bitching about having to pay so much for after saying every complaint should be heard.
View Quote
I meant what I said. Getting someone in front of a judge or getting yourself in front of a judge to disprove something shouldn't something you have to go through major costs to do. It's the getting to that point that I have a problem with. When the tactic seems to always be to bury someone with so much paperwork that it's cheaper to settle a frivolous lawsuit than it is to defend yourself, then you have a problem. Since you asked for it...my half-baked proposed solution is some sort of prehearing in front of a judge. By prehearing, I mean something where the basic case is presented before any discovery motions or any of the other piles of expensive paperwork lawyers like to create and long before you are required to answer to that pile. If the judge rules against the plaintiff's action, then the plaintiff can only continue only at their risk of having to pay for both party's legal fees. This would have greatly helped me. Since you make the accusation, I guess I should include a disclaimer. I make a living working for a company that, among other things, delivers documents for several law firms. While I don't directly derive income from law suits. We do get more business from delivering the paperwork.z
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 3:31:53 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 3:32:02 PM EDT
You hear "Sue!", "Sue!", "Sue!" all the time, even here on this site, every time something goes wrong. It's really, really sad. People resort to lawyers because they feel hurt somehow, and see lawyers as the way to make it right. Anybody who has ever had to use them, though, quickly learns that many times the only ones who ever end up "winning" are those who bill by the hour to fight the battle. Our society is addicted to lawyers. you can't give 'em up even if you wanted to, though, because other people keep bringing them to the party.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 3:39:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Aimless: I personally don't see a lot of frivolous lawsuits
View Quote
Well, that's good to know. I still didn't see a plan there for improving the system. zoom finally took a whack at it, but I was surprised to see just how much like my plan his was. Judges are elected, you know, at least here in Texas. They just happen to be elected [b]lawyers[/b].
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 3:51:42 PM EDT
I'm glad to see that there are some very valid points posted here, especially by attorneys. I am going to ponder a few of them for a while. I guess what I have trouble rationalizing are the cases like the McDonald's hot coffee incident. I guess its just me trying to apply rational logic to a situation where logic just doesn't apply. (After all, you would THINK that murderers wouldn't go free because someone signed the warrant on the wrong line...)
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 5:11:19 PM EDT
Personal responsibility in this country is simply going out the door. Idiots who spill coffee on themselves suing for millions. Tobacco companies paying the price for millions of smokers who CHOSE to smoke. Some of these pansies need to suck it up and take responsibility for their own actions.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 8:33:25 PM EDT
First and foremost, I would like to state that I am not defending nor attacking the judicial system. I would like to throw in however, that trial attorneys have done some valid and important work. After all, it wasn't fair that Ford should have been able to, knowingly, build an exploding car or that WR Grace should have been allowed to leave a million gallon cesspool of industrial waste out in the woods, etc.. Additionally, the judiciary is our constitutional method of redress of grievances (sp), without which many would have been left, when faced off against those with tremendous economic or polical power, with litte more than a stinging rectum and teethmarks in thier pillow. Euphemistically speaking of course. One other point I would make is that we rarely hear all the details of these cases. Example, the fellow who was awarded several million dollars (later knocked down on appeal) because the car purchased had received minor damage and was repainted without his knowledge before delivery (the defendant was the dealership). The award was not meant to be a payoff to the plaintiff, but punishment against the defendant who, it was proven, had done this many times before. The key being the established pattern of misbehavior. I believe that the same applied in the Mickey Dees case, that there were hundreds of complaints on file of people being injured by their product (scalded) but they did nothing to prevent further incidents. I'm not saying that I agree with the outcome, just that generally, those enormous awards revolve around a hisorical pattern of behavior and not one isolated occurence. PS: This is not trolling.
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 8:52:32 PM EDT
First off, coffee is HOT!! Duh... and if you are too stupid to put it in a cau carrier, or take the PROPER STEPS to keep ypurself from being burned, then you deserve what happens. It's letting off steam for Christ's sake!!!! And that case was settled out of court, because it was cheaper for McD's to settle than go to court. Second, all states should have laws that allow people like zoom to recoup ALL costs, pluse some damages for time spent and the stress and anguish suffered from this kinda crap. Here is an idea,let's find a lawyer to sue all lawyers who have EVER filed a frivilous lawsuit (and he woiuld have to sue him/herself in the process!!) and make them go bankruot for being stupid! Any lawyers willing to do this?
Link Posted: 5/2/2002 9:06:33 PM EDT
My apologies, I thought you had been refering to the much earlier, Mickey Dees hot coffee case. I stand by the points though.
Top Top