I don’t know how I survived for 56 years without lawyers protecting me from defective tires, asbestos, and baby cribs. I feel much safer knowing lawyers are suing the pants off everyone although I’m not sure if I will be able to afford health care, medicines, and car insurance now.
Why do the rest of us get such guilty pleasure watching the self-righteous take their turn in the hot seat? Could it be because they’ve made our’s the most litigious nation on the face of the planet where no one is accountable for their own actions ?????? Naw… We must just be jealous.
Ditto to what Chuck says. Legal terrorism is a greater threat to our nation than those with bombs and guns. Trial lawyers file frivolous lawsuits tying up the courts and causing insurance companies, self-insureds and private individuals to spend money defending outrageous claims with no merit.
To the trial lawyers I say, please, let me look out for myself, I have done okay for 55 years.
She says to stop the vitriol. I say people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
If you watch TV for more than 30 minutes, you’ll see a Lawyer touting his success against “the big insurance companies”, or urging a call if you’ve “been injured at work” or “auto accident”.
Unfortunately, the trial lawyers have helped create a mindset in this country that if something happens that you don’t like, you can sue someone and get rich. The strong work ethics on which this country were founded have deteriorated, so a large settlement is so much better than having to go out and work for a living. The moral fabric of society has decayed. Most students have no compunction about cheating-it’s a way to get ahead. Why should anyone take responsibility for his or her actions when it’s easier to blame someone else? It’s not just the lawyers, but they have certainly made it seem that life would be better if you could sue someone and be able to live the good life without having to work. The ads on television depicting the so-called injured who proudly decry that their attorney “got me the settlement I deserved” only contribute to our demise.
It’s hard to know if Plaintiff Attys believe what they preach or if, secretly, they really don’t. Either way, it makes for a sad situation and a serious problem for the rest of us.
Let’s put things into perspective—Ford Pinto; asbestos; Thalidomyde; Love Canal; breast removal for incorrectly diagnosed cancer; Vioxx; ad infinitum.
And, have we noticed how “trial lawyers” are bad, but “corporate lawyers” are OK?
I know I’m glad that if big business deliberately, knowingly and negligently maims me, ruins my health, or causes my death that there are lawyers willing to defend me or my family.
Let’s quit using vitriolic labels, the purpose of which are to promote a slanted specific agenda intended to serve as decoys to the public.
Besides, how may lawyers are in the US Congress & Senate??????
Law, like any other profession (gee, insurance, medicine?) is only as good as the self-policing of its own members.
Trial attorneys gleefully pursue the faulty concept that products and services should be risk free, when nothing is. Be it automobiles, bicycles, rollerblades, skateboards, baseball, football, salt, sugar, butter, food and drugs: each activity or product entails a risk of injury or death….even when they are used properly. As long as trial attorneys can convince our judicial system and juries that their specious arguments have merit, they will continue to privateer the productive members of our economy under the banners of justice.
“Let’s put things into perspective—Ford Pinto; asbestos; Thalidomyde; Love Canal; breast removal for incorrectly diagnosed cancer; Vioxx; ad infinitum.”
Are you saying that but for lawyers these these situations would still be with us??
Lawyers like to hang around and shed crocodile tears about what should have been done…and then only if there is a big enough fee in it for them. If lawyers were truly talented and altruistic, they could spend time lobbying for changes that would positively affect the future. But that would kill the golden goose, wouldn’t it?
Remember the Martha Stewart…now languishing in prison only for statements she made upon advice of legal counsel!!!
Lady, are you serious?! Did you hear Super PI Edward’s concession (smirk) speech? You “should” be proud of that weasel. Whazzup with you people besides feeding at the public trough? The public spoke loudly and clearly. You and your ilk better get a grip before you are banned from society altogether. There is no mystique attached to PI lawyers, except by the ignorant, so don’t be patting yourself on the back about all the good you bring to mankind. You and your ACLU buds are the single biggest danger to America! Buzz off!!!!
We could argue all day about lawyers and frivolous lawsuits. When I got into this industry, I thought lawyers were the scum of the earth. Now I think doctors are worse than the lawyers. Opinions change. When injured, the first thought most of us will have is to get a lawyer. Perhaps this is just the result of all the advertizing. Who knows?
What we really need to do is to get rid of the “American Rule” (each party pays)and adopt the “English Rule” (loser pays). Believe me – the frivolous lawsuits will dry up like a prune.
Do some Trial Attorneys deserve criticism? Of Course
Is the solution to stamp out all Trial Attorneys? Of Course Not
Many people belong to a group that at some point has lost a battle to a trial attorney. They support limiting the ability of trial attorneys to do their job. The problem with that is that the trial attorney’s job is to represent a person in a court of law who feels that they have been wronged.
The right to seek redress in a court of law is one given to us by our founding fathers. You only have to read the words of Thomas Jefferson to understand how strongly they felt that we should have the right to settle our differences in a court of law. He stated that we should not only protect this right with all of our abilities, but if it were ever taken away from us, we should fight to regain it.
Too many people seem to be worried about being sued. Of course there are cases when you should have concern. You should have adequate liability insurance, but everyone should feel that they live their lives, and conduct their business in a manner that precludes their being sued.
In many cases today the only way you can send a message to some people that they are not acting properly is to file a lawsuit. I found myself in this situation when a Doctor failed to that the proper action to save my wife’s life. Not only did he not talk to me after she died, but he was on vacation. His partner met me in the hall outside the ICU to tell me my wife was dead.
I think God for at least one Trial Attorney. She not only took my case and fought for two years, but was also willing to fight my case in court. The Doctor, and his Insurance company threw in the towel and paid off to the limit of his insurance policy just two weeks before the trial date. They did not do this because a crooked Trial Attorney took advantage of them. They did it because they knew they could not defend the Doctors actions in court.
My attorney also filed a complaint with the Florida Department of Health. Five years later they finally got around to finding him at fault in my wife’s death. They fined him three thousand dollars. I feel that the state insulted my wife by saying her life was only worth three thousand dollars, and should a person have to wait five years for justice? I do not feel bad for my lawsuit against this Doctor, and I thank God we have Trial Attorneys to represent us.
I was particularly moved by Mr. Langdon’s thoughtful and touching comments. They reminded me that there are many situations in which lawsuits are a necessary part of bringing justice and recompense for legitimate injuries.
The fact is that people don’t always act responsibly and government regulation only does so much to protect the health and safety of citizens. Money is a tremendous motivator. It motivates the plaintiff’s lawyers to work tremendously hard for their clients. It also motivates companies to avoid the excessive costs of personal injury lawsuits by incorporating into their products engineering innovations that improve the products and do make people safer.
As a defense lawyer for an insurance company, I would also like to point out that opposing every “trial lawyer” as discussed in the article is an equally dedicated (albeit often not equally compensated) trial lawyer doing everything in his ethical and lawful power to defend his client and get the jury to see the defense’s side of the case.
So, while there is in my view a clear need for reform, we should be thoughtful in our criticism and remember that the solution does not lie in vilifying “trial lawyers as a group, but in implementing meaningful reforms that balance the interests of litigants and the interests of the public.
Kathy, you can’t pick up a phone book without 15 lawyer ads staring you in the face. The lawyer section of the yellow pages account for about 20% of the phone book ad revenues.
Thanks to trial attorneys and their Naderite causes, we have a plethora of class action suits for any issue. You smoke? Sue the tobacco company for stuffing a butt in you face and making you inhale. Your liver dead from alcohol? Balem the liquor industry for feeding you booze every day. the difference between Nader and the present-day bottom feeders is that they fought for a cause, but the trial attorneys of today fight for a bonanza.
How much does a class action suit pay per capita? How come the plaintiff’s attorney can fly around in Gulfstream jets?
Get off it! When you folks become a real public service, I’ll support you with my donations. Until then, stop blowing smoke up my behind!
AS soon as the trial lawyers start flying coach, struggling to make a living and get by paycheck to paycheck…oh well, that is only a dream. When the typical class action suit “rewards” members with something other than a couple of dollars or a certificate for a future purchase, then the trial lawyers can step up and make a case. Right now, they make hundreds of millions of dollars and a typical plaintiff gets virtually nothing, escept higher prices as those attorney fees are passed along through increased cost of goods sold.
Give me a break. Our country will get better when the trial attorneys are a part of history.
I’ve read through all of your responses and have one question for each of you…
What do you think the real solution is?
We can continue to point out all of the innadequacies of the legal system, trial lawyers, individuals and corporations. However, if half of you put as much energy into coming up with a viable solution, we might be in a much better place.
I can definitely see both sides of this arguement. If I was wronged, I hope that there would be a highly qualified attorney out there who was willing to take my case out of principle, the monetary gain is secondary. However, we also need to eliminate the frivolous lawsuits that continue to bog down the courts and ultimately cost us all money.
The most viable answer that I have read here is making the loser of the lawsuit pay all. Additionally, the jury should be able to decide if the lawsuit was frivolous and impose punitive damages upon the plaintiff and their attorney. This would discourage those who are dishonest and greedy from bringing cases.
But let’s all get real, we will never completely eliminate frivolous lawsuits. In countries wherein they cut off your arm if you steal, they still have thieves.
First and foremost, I would like point out that trial lawyers do not pursue justice by nature any more that a hammer does. They represent the interests that they are paid to represent, and pursue them regardless of any higher purpose. Their services, morality and ethics are leased on an hourly basis. As such, I can be certain that any attempt at justice which compromises their cash flow will be whole-heartly refuted by them all, including the ones in Congress. But for the sake of irony I will illustrate a solution while knowing it is pointless:
1. Extend the ERISA provisions which allow insurance companies to be contemptious of plaintiff’s attempts to collect on their contractual obligations, to all U.S. corporations and individuals. As written, it violates the Constitution provisions of equal protection under the law by giving the insurance industry superior footing in civil actions.
2.Establish a Federal Maximum Wage limit for publically held corporations and lawyers in class action lawsuits. By doing this you protect the public from being used by unscrupulous individuals.
3.Limit campaign contributions from law firms and insurance companies to elected judiciary officials.
4. Disallow spouses of judges and legislators to work as lobbyists: a seeming no-brainer that is all too common an occurrance for me to believe it to be coincidental.
5. Move interstate class action suits to the federal court system to eliminate venue shopping.
6. Setlegal guidelines to establish levels of acceptable and unacceptable risks, since zero risk is myth.
7. Use the lions share of punitive damages awarded in civil cases to educate the industries and individuals involved. I for one would feel much better knowing bad doctors were receiving remedial training rather than huge fines for human mistakes.
Implementation of these statages would go far to resolve the problems (opportunities)caused by our legistlatures (lawyers) in our current justice (just us) system.
But since our laws are written by the lawyers and for the lawyers, I doubt if it will happen.
I was immensely relieved to see the trial lawyers come away empty-handed after the last election. The ATLA dumped tens of millions into the last election. In fact, the trial lawyers were far and away the #1 campaign contributors to the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
The ATLA is an incredibly powerful lot. Even the Republican Senate & Congress has not been enough to get tort reform passed. The fact is many lawyers are serving in Congress, the Senate or State legislatures. They all too often write the laws. And they often keep laws from being written that might help hem in the abuses of the plaintiff’s bar.
The ATLA feels the hot breath of the public on its neck. And the plaintiff’s bar has a heck of a lot to lose. But history is on their side. The public sentiment is on their side. Even the defense bar is, I think, sometimes on the ATLA’s side. It is in the long term interests of the defense bar to see liability expand. It provides more opportunities to defend lawsuits and make money.
What we have here, I think, is a new form of “creeping socialism”. Now that everyone has to have insurance to function the plaintiff’s bar knows that it can sue just about anyone and have an insurance company calling the shots on the other side.
And we all know how insurance companies handle claims: It’s all about the economics. What claims adjuster will ever be able to justify a bad result at trial in a lawsuit that was fought on principle? It’s suicide in this business to fight on principle. So, the lawyers now routinely file suit knowing they can always hope to get “cost of defense” or “nuisance” value. Yes, we can blame insurance companies for throwing the baby to the wolves… leading the wolves to come back looking for the bigger baby time and time again.
And we can blame the insurance companies for not better policing the defense bar and managing the defense attornies. These attorneies far too often handle cases without revealing weaknesses in the defense until the defense attornies have made their money off the file and trial looms. As such, I have limited respect for many if not most the larger defense firms the insurance industry has created and supports.
Frankly, I sometimes even find myself thinking that some plaintiff’s lawyers might well have a better work ethic than many defense attornies. Twenty years in the is business have taught me that there is too much greed and avarice on both sides of the fence when it comes to lawyers and their compensation for what they do.
We can also blame judges for being gulity of what I like to call “judicial abdication”…for being weak and for being more concerned about making cases go away via insurance company payouts than reaching a fair result. At times, we can even rightly blame judges for being in league with the plaintiff’s bar!
But whoever we blame for a legal system out of control, lets not forget to look in the mirror and ask what we as a society might have done to help create this litigation monster that is tearing us apart and eating us alive.
For the truth is that lawyers increasingly sue knowing that public opinion shifts over time. Plaintiff’s lawyers see the emerging biases in society. They know when it’s now safely on their side. The plaintiff’s bar knows, for example, that public is often more than ready to throw the book at the tobacco companies for lying – even though few if any smokers ever really lit one up a single bloody cigarette thinking it did NOT have the potential to cause cancer.
9/11 was caused by terrorists. But they are not likely to step up to the plate and pay the freight are they? So the victims of terrorism seek to make a host of business pay for an act they did not commit. It was not enough that the Federal government set up a fund to pay billions to the victims. Still we see lawsuits being brought against everyone and their dog.
Yes, maybe the net result will be that next time around maybe we’ll be a bit more careful about who we let on planes, how we build buildings and so on and so forth. But does it really make sense to make a supposedly negligent person or company pay for the intentional torts and actual crimes of others? I think not.
We as a society increasingly make a farce of the legal system. The terrorists must be falling off their chairs laughing at trhe fact of Americans responding to terrorist acts by filing lawsuits and angrily pointing fingers at one another – as if anyone BUT the terrorists could really be deemed morally responsible for these evil deeds.
Some may say that in assigning liability to folks other than terrorists we only seek to hold them legally responsible… not morally responsible. But a legal system that is not primarily concerned with enforcing a sense of moral order or responsibility is a system designed to fail. It is a senseless, decadent and corrupt legal system.
One final thought: As a society evolves and as its standard of living rises the legal system will reflect this advance in civilization – by imposing ever higher standards of liability. But just as our standard of living is now threatened by the need of the rest of so much of the world to catch up to ours, in that same way our legal system is arguably increasingly undermining our ability to compete with the rest of the world.
But there is hope. Someday the rest of the world may also willing to sue over pretty much anything and everything. Until then, we can be sure that whenever possible the world will always come to America to file its lawsuits – and that means lots of work for us insurance types! ;-)
JLC
How about a no-fault track up to say $100,000? Beyond that, we’ll have loser pays. I think juries will see only meritorious lawsuits at that point, and very few at that!
Hey Fred, Guess what. Who you do think you will run to when you get into a bad accident, get laid up from job, need medical bills paid, suffer horrible pain and suffering, etc, and the insurance company drags its feet to respond to your plea for coverage? Yep. A good trial lawyer, and I am sure you would not mind at all if John Edwards knocks at your door to protect your rights as an accident victim. You and a whole lot of you are
victims of misinformation and shallow thinking, i.e. bigotry.
All I can add is that in order to be respected, you have to respect others. It’s not in a trial lawyers genes. Punitive damages, treble damages and excessive awards drive up everyone’s expenses. There should be caps on awards, except where gross negligence or intentional disregard exists. And every case is not worthy of that status. Life assumes risk and not every injury justifies making someone else pay.
In recent years we have witnessed the demise and resurrection of tne medical professionals’ existence in the good ‘ol State of Texas, all dictated and hanging in the balance due to our litigious trial lawyers’ yearing for that “pot of gold” mentality we know as medical malpractice. How can you justify the actions of trial attorneys scheming and calculating new and inventive ways to milk both the medical professional and their malpractice insurance carrier of monies averaging $3 million per suit they couldn’t possibly have earned from an honest profession in 10 years of hard labor? You dare try and justify that the average attorney suing and winning these cases deserves these type of cash winnings for literally no effort other than routine procedure? Don’t you realize these Physicians have sacrificed 12 to 15 years dedicating their lives to medicine with no concept of family life or meaningful realtionship outside of their field of study, just to have some mediocre leach suck the lifeblood out of their dignity until they are so jaded that they deny concious thought with their patients just to avoid the potential of another blood sucking attorney’s reproach? What gives these ingrates the privilege, or should I say “the legal right to steal” from insurance companies, and inevitably from our medical professionals? Who do you think this vicious cycle ultimately effects? That’s right… us… the consumer! Shame on your justification, for we know that there is no such thing as “justification” for truth and honesty. Your ego-centric subjectivity saddens us, and mark my words when I say that your way of thinking if perpetuated will be the downfall of our free society. The root of all evil = litigious trial attorneys! Work Pro-Bono if you’re so righteous!!! Way to go Fred Fazand! At least someone other than myself has the cohones to speak their mind against these shysters!
Wow Mr. Edddduuhhhh!! What a concept! Maybe we should lobby for genetic engineering and heredity manipulation of our youth to subconciously react to human error, fault, and complex decision resolution as immediate means to “conact their attorneys”!!! You’re right! Why should anyone have to think for themselves. Medical billing is far too complex for the average person, so let’s all gather up our attorneys to collect 30 to 40 percent of our proposed suit against our insurance carrier for a settlement that won’t even pay our medical bills after our attorneys pay themselves… yeah… that makes sense!!! Way to pass the buck Eddduuhhh!
For Ed Suh: Have you ever heard of the Department of Insurance? I’m sure if your medical billing is incorrect or overstated in any way, shape or form, and is being disputed by your insurance carrier, your State Dept. of Insurance regulates the insurance carriers operating in your State and protects you, the consumer against fraud or misconduct. They are the ultimate decider as to whether or not that carrier is allowed to hold a license to operate in your State. Way to think things through Ed.
I don’t know how I survived for 56 years without lawyers protecting me from defective tires, asbestos, and baby cribs. I feel much safer knowing lawyers are suing the pants off everyone although I’m not sure if I will be able to afford health care, medicines, and car insurance now.
Chuck,
Right On!
PS. I hope you didn’t take Vioxx, breathe sand dust, or that your wife didn’t miss the black mold in your bathroom when she rented out your house.
If ifnroamiton were soccer, this would be a goooooal!
Why do the rest of us get such guilty pleasure watching the self-righteous take their turn in the hot seat? Could it be because they’ve made our’s the most litigious nation on the face of the planet where no one is accountable for their own actions ?????? Naw… We must just be jealous.
Ditto to what Chuck says. Legal terrorism is a greater threat to our nation than those with bombs and guns. Trial lawyers file frivolous lawsuits tying up the courts and causing insurance companies, self-insureds and private individuals to spend money defending outrageous claims with no merit.
To the trial lawyers I say, please, let me look out for myself, I have done okay for 55 years.
She says to stop the vitriol. I say people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
If you watch TV for more than 30 minutes, you’ll see a Lawyer touting his success against “the big insurance companies”, or urging a call if you’ve “been injured at work” or “auto accident”.
No wonder there’s vitirol – they started it.
Ever notice how personal injury attorneys only call for a truce when they are losing?
Unfortunately, the trial lawyers have helped create a mindset in this country that if something happens that you don’t like, you can sue someone and get rich. The strong work ethics on which this country were founded have deteriorated, so a large settlement is so much better than having to go out and work for a living. The moral fabric of society has decayed. Most students have no compunction about cheating-it’s a way to get ahead. Why should anyone take responsibility for his or her actions when it’s easier to blame someone else? It’s not just the lawyers, but they have certainly made it seem that life would be better if you could sue someone and be able to live the good life without having to work. The ads on television depicting the so-called injured who proudly decry that their attorney “got me the settlement I deserved” only contribute to our demise.
It’s hard to know if Plaintiff Attys believe what they preach or if, secretly, they really don’t. Either way, it makes for a sad situation and a serious problem for the rest of us.
Let’s put things into perspective—Ford Pinto; asbestos; Thalidomyde; Love Canal; breast removal for incorrectly diagnosed cancer; Vioxx; ad infinitum.
And, have we noticed how “trial lawyers” are bad, but “corporate lawyers” are OK?
I know I’m glad that if big business deliberately, knowingly and negligently maims me, ruins my health, or causes my death that there are lawyers willing to defend me or my family.
Let’s quit using vitriolic labels, the purpose of which are to promote a slanted specific agenda intended to serve as decoys to the public.
Besides, how may lawyers are in the US Congress & Senate??????
Law, like any other profession (gee, insurance, medicine?) is only as good as the self-policing of its own members.
Trial attorneys gleefully pursue the faulty concept that products and services should be risk free, when nothing is. Be it automobiles, bicycles, rollerblades, skateboards, baseball, football, salt, sugar, butter, food and drugs: each activity or product entails a risk of injury or death….even when they are used properly. As long as trial attorneys can convince our judicial system and juries that their specious arguments have merit, they will continue to privateer the productive members of our economy under the banners of justice.
Kathy…
You start your comment with…
“Let’s put things into perspective—Ford Pinto; asbestos; Thalidomyde; Love Canal; breast removal for incorrectly diagnosed cancer; Vioxx; ad infinitum.”
Are you saying that but for lawyers these these situations would still be with us??
Lawyers like to hang around and shed crocodile tears about what should have been done…and then only if there is a big enough fee in it for them. If lawyers were truly talented and altruistic, they could spend time lobbying for changes that would positively affect the future. But that would kill the golden goose, wouldn’t it?
Remember the Martha Stewart…now languishing in prison only for statements she made upon advice of legal counsel!!!
Lady, are you serious?! Did you hear Super PI Edward’s concession (smirk) speech? You “should” be proud of that weasel. Whazzup with you people besides feeding at the public trough? The public spoke loudly and clearly. You and your ilk better get a grip before you are banned from society altogether. There is no mystique attached to PI lawyers, except by the ignorant, so don’t be patting yourself on the back about all the good you bring to mankind. You and your ACLU buds are the single biggest danger to America! Buzz off!!!!
We could argue all day about lawyers and frivolous lawsuits. When I got into this industry, I thought lawyers were the scum of the earth. Now I think doctors are worse than the lawyers. Opinions change. When injured, the first thought most of us will have is to get a lawyer. Perhaps this is just the result of all the advertizing. Who knows?
What we really need to do is to get rid of the “American Rule” (each party pays)and adopt the “English Rule” (loser pays). Believe me – the frivolous lawsuits will dry up like a prune.
Do some Trial Attorneys deserve criticism? Of Course
Is the solution to stamp out all Trial Attorneys? Of Course Not
Many people belong to a group that at some point has lost a battle to a trial attorney. They support limiting the ability of trial attorneys to do their job. The problem with that is that the trial attorney’s job is to represent a person in a court of law who feels that they have been wronged.
The right to seek redress in a court of law is one given to us by our founding fathers. You only have to read the words of Thomas Jefferson to understand how strongly they felt that we should have the right to settle our differences in a court of law. He stated that we should not only protect this right with all of our abilities, but if it were ever taken away from us, we should fight to regain it.
Too many people seem to be worried about being sued. Of course there are cases when you should have concern. You should have adequate liability insurance, but everyone should feel that they live their lives, and conduct their business in a manner that precludes their being sued.
In many cases today the only way you can send a message to some people that they are not acting properly is to file a lawsuit. I found myself in this situation when a Doctor failed to that the proper action to save my wife’s life. Not only did he not talk to me after she died, but he was on vacation. His partner met me in the hall outside the ICU to tell me my wife was dead.
I think God for at least one Trial Attorney. She not only took my case and fought for two years, but was also willing to fight my case in court. The Doctor, and his Insurance company threw in the towel and paid off to the limit of his insurance policy just two weeks before the trial date. They did not do this because a crooked Trial Attorney took advantage of them. They did it because they knew they could not defend the Doctors actions in court.
My attorney also filed a complaint with the Florida Department of Health. Five years later they finally got around to finding him at fault in my wife’s death. They fined him three thousand dollars. I feel that the state insulted my wife by saying her life was only worth three thousand dollars, and should a person have to wait five years for justice? I do not feel bad for my lawsuit against this Doctor, and I thank God we have Trial Attorneys to represent us.
I was particularly moved by Mr. Langdon’s thoughtful and touching comments. They reminded me that there are many situations in which lawsuits are a necessary part of bringing justice and recompense for legitimate injuries.
The fact is that people don’t always act responsibly and government regulation only does so much to protect the health and safety of citizens. Money is a tremendous motivator. It motivates the plaintiff’s lawyers to work tremendously hard for their clients. It also motivates companies to avoid the excessive costs of personal injury lawsuits by incorporating into their products engineering innovations that improve the products and do make people safer.
As a defense lawyer for an insurance company, I would also like to point out that opposing every “trial lawyer” as discussed in the article is an equally dedicated (albeit often not equally compensated) trial lawyer doing everything in his ethical and lawful power to defend his client and get the jury to see the defense’s side of the case.
So, while there is in my view a clear need for reform, we should be thoughtful in our criticism and remember that the solution does not lie in vilifying “trial lawyers as a group, but in implementing meaningful reforms that balance the interests of litigants and the interests of the public.
Even in this article she’s bad mouthing the other side. I quote:
“We are proud of what we do, fighting for consumers against large insurance companies who don’t treat them fairly. . .”
If you’re going to call for a truce, it might be smart to stop shooting yourself.
At least big tobacco knows its not telling the whole truth….
Kathy, you can’t pick up a phone book without 15 lawyer ads staring you in the face. The lawyer section of the yellow pages account for about 20% of the phone book ad revenues.
Thanks to trial attorneys and their Naderite causes, we have a plethora of class action suits for any issue. You smoke? Sue the tobacco company for stuffing a butt in you face and making you inhale. Your liver dead from alcohol? Balem the liquor industry for feeding you booze every day. the difference between Nader and the present-day bottom feeders is that they fought for a cause, but the trial attorneys of today fight for a bonanza.
How much does a class action suit pay per capita? How come the plaintiff’s attorney can fly around in Gulfstream jets?
Get off it! When you folks become a real public service, I’ll support you with my donations. Until then, stop blowing smoke up my behind!
AS soon as the trial lawyers start flying coach, struggling to make a living and get by paycheck to paycheck…oh well, that is only a dream. When the typical class action suit “rewards” members with something other than a couple of dollars or a certificate for a future purchase, then the trial lawyers can step up and make a case. Right now, they make hundreds of millions of dollars and a typical plaintiff gets virtually nothing, escept higher prices as those attorney fees are passed along through increased cost of goods sold.
Give me a break. Our country will get better when the trial attorneys are a part of history.
So, when Big Insurance refuses to settle my legitimate claim, am I supposed to just accept nothing from them, when I paid my premiums as agreed?
I’ve read through all of your responses and have one question for each of you…
What do you think the real solution is?
We can continue to point out all of the innadequacies of the legal system, trial lawyers, individuals and corporations. However, if half of you put as much energy into coming up with a viable solution, we might be in a much better place.
I can definitely see both sides of this arguement. If I was wronged, I hope that there would be a highly qualified attorney out there who was willing to take my case out of principle, the monetary gain is secondary. However, we also need to eliminate the frivolous lawsuits that continue to bog down the courts and ultimately cost us all money.
The most viable answer that I have read here is making the loser of the lawsuit pay all. Additionally, the jury should be able to decide if the lawsuit was frivolous and impose punitive damages upon the plaintiff and their attorney. This would discourage those who are dishonest and greedy from bringing cases.
But let’s all get real, we will never completely eliminate frivolous lawsuits. In countries wherein they cut off your arm if you steal, they still have thieves.
Go figure.
First and foremost, I would like point out that trial lawyers do not pursue justice by nature any more that a hammer does. They represent the interests that they are paid to represent, and pursue them regardless of any higher purpose. Their services, morality and ethics are leased on an hourly basis. As such, I can be certain that any attempt at justice which compromises their cash flow will be whole-heartly refuted by them all, including the ones in Congress. But for the sake of irony I will illustrate a solution while knowing it is pointless:
1. Extend the ERISA provisions which allow insurance companies to be contemptious of plaintiff’s attempts to collect on their contractual obligations, to all U.S. corporations and individuals. As written, it violates the Constitution provisions of equal protection under the law by giving the insurance industry superior footing in civil actions.
2.Establish a Federal Maximum Wage limit for publically held corporations and lawyers in class action lawsuits. By doing this you protect the public from being used by unscrupulous individuals.
3.Limit campaign contributions from law firms and insurance companies to elected judiciary officials.
4. Disallow spouses of judges and legislators to work as lobbyists: a seeming no-brainer that is all too common an occurrance for me to believe it to be coincidental.
5. Move interstate class action suits to the federal court system to eliminate venue shopping.
6. Setlegal guidelines to establish levels of acceptable and unacceptable risks, since zero risk is myth.
7. Use the lions share of punitive damages awarded in civil cases to educate the industries and individuals involved. I for one would feel much better knowing bad doctors were receiving remedial training rather than huge fines for human mistakes.
Implementation of these statages would go far to resolve the problems (opportunities)caused by our legistlatures (lawyers) in our current justice (just us) system.
But since our laws are written by the lawyers and for the lawyers, I doubt if it will happen.
I was immensely relieved to see the trial lawyers come away empty-handed after the last election. The ATLA dumped tens of millions into the last election. In fact, the trial lawyers were far and away the #1 campaign contributors to the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
The ATLA is an incredibly powerful lot. Even the Republican Senate & Congress has not been enough to get tort reform passed. The fact is many lawyers are serving in Congress, the Senate or State legislatures. They all too often write the laws. And they often keep laws from being written that might help hem in the abuses of the plaintiff’s bar.
The ATLA feels the hot breath of the public on its neck. And the plaintiff’s bar has a heck of a lot to lose. But history is on their side. The public sentiment is on their side. Even the defense bar is, I think, sometimes on the ATLA’s side. It is in the long term interests of the defense bar to see liability expand. It provides more opportunities to defend lawsuits and make money.
What we have here, I think, is a new form of “creeping socialism”. Now that everyone has to have insurance to function the plaintiff’s bar knows that it can sue just about anyone and have an insurance company calling the shots on the other side.
And we all know how insurance companies handle claims: It’s all about the economics. What claims adjuster will ever be able to justify a bad result at trial in a lawsuit that was fought on principle? It’s suicide in this business to fight on principle. So, the lawyers now routinely file suit knowing they can always hope to get “cost of defense” or “nuisance” value. Yes, we can blame insurance companies for throwing the baby to the wolves… leading the wolves to come back looking for the bigger baby time and time again.
And we can blame the insurance companies for not better policing the defense bar and managing the defense attornies. These attorneies far too often handle cases without revealing weaknesses in the defense until the defense attornies have made their money off the file and trial looms. As such, I have limited respect for many if not most the larger defense firms the insurance industry has created and supports.
Frankly, I sometimes even find myself thinking that some plaintiff’s lawyers might well have a better work ethic than many defense attornies. Twenty years in the is business have taught me that there is too much greed and avarice on both sides of the fence when it comes to lawyers and their compensation for what they do.
We can also blame judges for being gulity of what I like to call “judicial abdication”…for being weak and for being more concerned about making cases go away via insurance company payouts than reaching a fair result. At times, we can even rightly blame judges for being in league with the plaintiff’s bar!
But whoever we blame for a legal system out of control, lets not forget to look in the mirror and ask what we as a society might have done to help create this litigation monster that is tearing us apart and eating us alive.
For the truth is that lawyers increasingly sue knowing that public opinion shifts over time. Plaintiff’s lawyers see the emerging biases in society. They know when it’s now safely on their side. The plaintiff’s bar knows, for example, that public is often more than ready to throw the book at the tobacco companies for lying – even though few if any smokers ever really lit one up a single bloody cigarette thinking it did NOT have the potential to cause cancer.
9/11 was caused by terrorists. But they are not likely to step up to the plate and pay the freight are they? So the victims of terrorism seek to make a host of business pay for an act they did not commit. It was not enough that the Federal government set up a fund to pay billions to the victims. Still we see lawsuits being brought against everyone and their dog.
Yes, maybe the net result will be that next time around maybe we’ll be a bit more careful about who we let on planes, how we build buildings and so on and so forth. But does it really make sense to make a supposedly negligent person or company pay for the intentional torts and actual crimes of others? I think not.
We as a society increasingly make a farce of the legal system. The terrorists must be falling off their chairs laughing at trhe fact of Americans responding to terrorist acts by filing lawsuits and angrily pointing fingers at one another – as if anyone BUT the terrorists could really be deemed morally responsible for these evil deeds.
Some may say that in assigning liability to folks other than terrorists we only seek to hold them legally responsible… not morally responsible. But a legal system that is not primarily concerned with enforcing a sense of moral order or responsibility is a system designed to fail. It is a senseless, decadent and corrupt legal system.
One final thought: As a society evolves and as its standard of living rises the legal system will reflect this advance in civilization – by imposing ever higher standards of liability. But just as our standard of living is now threatened by the need of the rest of so much of the world to catch up to ours, in that same way our legal system is arguably increasingly undermining our ability to compete with the rest of the world.
But there is hope. Someday the rest of the world may also willing to sue over pretty much anything and everything. Until then, we can be sure that whenever possible the world will always come to America to file its lawsuits – and that means lots of work for us insurance types! ;-)
JLC
How about a no-fault track up to say $100,000? Beyond that, we’ll have loser pays. I think juries will see only meritorious lawsuits at that point, and very few at that!
Hey Fred, Guess what. Who you do think you will run to when you get into a bad accident, get laid up from job, need medical bills paid, suffer horrible pain and suffering, etc, and the insurance company drags its feet to respond to your plea for coverage? Yep. A good trial lawyer, and I am sure you would not mind at all if John Edwards knocks at your door to protect your rights as an accident victim. You and a whole lot of you are
victims of misinformation and shallow thinking, i.e. bigotry.
All I can add is that in order to be respected, you have to respect others. It’s not in a trial lawyers genes. Punitive damages, treble damages and excessive awards drive up everyone’s expenses. There should be caps on awards, except where gross negligence or intentional disregard exists. And every case is not worthy of that status. Life assumes risk and not every injury justifies making someone else pay.
In recent years we have witnessed the demise and resurrection of tne medical professionals’ existence in the good ‘ol State of Texas, all dictated and hanging in the balance due to our litigious trial lawyers’ yearing for that “pot of gold” mentality we know as medical malpractice. How can you justify the actions of trial attorneys scheming and calculating new and inventive ways to milk both the medical professional and their malpractice insurance carrier of monies averaging $3 million per suit they couldn’t possibly have earned from an honest profession in 10 years of hard labor? You dare try and justify that the average attorney suing and winning these cases deserves these type of cash winnings for literally no effort other than routine procedure? Don’t you realize these Physicians have sacrificed 12 to 15 years dedicating their lives to medicine with no concept of family life or meaningful realtionship outside of their field of study, just to have some mediocre leach suck the lifeblood out of their dignity until they are so jaded that they deny concious thought with their patients just to avoid the potential of another blood sucking attorney’s reproach? What gives these ingrates the privilege, or should I say “the legal right to steal” from insurance companies, and inevitably from our medical professionals? Who do you think this vicious cycle ultimately effects? That’s right… us… the consumer! Shame on your justification, for we know that there is no such thing as “justification” for truth and honesty. Your ego-centric subjectivity saddens us, and mark my words when I say that your way of thinking if perpetuated will be the downfall of our free society. The root of all evil = litigious trial attorneys! Work Pro-Bono if you’re so righteous!!! Way to go Fred Fazand! At least someone other than myself has the cohones to speak their mind against these shysters!
Wow Mr. Edddduuhhhh!! What a concept! Maybe we should lobby for genetic engineering and heredity manipulation of our youth to subconciously react to human error, fault, and complex decision resolution as immediate means to “conact their attorneys”!!! You’re right! Why should anyone have to think for themselves. Medical billing is far too complex for the average person, so let’s all gather up our attorneys to collect 30 to 40 percent of our proposed suit against our insurance carrier for a settlement that won’t even pay our medical bills after our attorneys pay themselves… yeah… that makes sense!!! Way to pass the buck Eddduuhhh!
For Ed Suh: Have you ever heard of the Department of Insurance? I’m sure if your medical billing is incorrect or overstated in any way, shape or form, and is being disputed by your insurance carrier, your State Dept. of Insurance regulates the insurance carriers operating in your State and protects you, the consumer against fraud or misconduct. They are the ultimate decider as to whether or not that carrier is allowed to hold a license to operate in your State. Way to think things through Ed.