Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Overlawyered??

  1. #1

    Overlawyered??

    [QUOTE]Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Gisela Cardonne Ely was shocked. She had just watched a videotape of a medical malpractice plaintiff, who claimed in 2004 that she was permanently paralyzed, walking down the street with the use of a cane in 2005.

    "This is the worst case of misrepresentation, of outright fraud, that I have ever had in 22 years," Cardonne Ely said during a March 15 hearing in the case of Wanda Davis-Johnson. "I'm telling you, Mrs. Davis, I'm looking at you in the eyes. I am dismissing your case. I have seen enough. ... I'm making a specific finding that there was a scheme to defraud the court."

    The woman's attorney, of course, claims to be just as surprised as the judge. Meanwhile, [b]the vindicated defendant hospital "will be seeking to recover $225,000 in legal costs from Davis-Johnson," but one suspects that the odds of ever collecting that are somewhere between none and less than none.[/b][/QUOTE]
    [url=http://www.overlawyered.com/2007/04/walk_away.html] source [/url]

    That's one of the changes we need to our tort system: if the plaintiff loses, he/she/it pays the legal fees of the defendent.

    Davis-Johnson needs to pay--even if it's $100/mo the rest of her life

    Same with the nut-job who accused the Duke guys of rape, although that PA should also help pay for their legal costs.

    Opinions??

  2. #2
    It won't make too much of a difference, to be quite honest. In theroy it is a great idea, but the threat of a law suit leads to eventual settlements regardless of the claim.

  3. #3
    [QUOTE=mallamalla]It won't make too much of a difference, to be quite honest. In theroy it is a great idea, but the threat of a law suit leads to eventual settlements regardless of the claim.[/QUOTE]

    It's actually a terrible idea, since that would effectively bar all but the richest of plaintiffs from the courts.

    And I say this as a lawyer who is more often than not on the defense side, and who has actually had a case where a plaintiff testified to a supposed assault by store employees only to have videotape show something very very different.

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=doggin94it]It's actually a terrible idea, since that would effectively bar all but the richest of plaintiffs from the courts.
    [/QUOTE]

    Why?--if the plaintiff is truly wronged and has a good case they'll win! Making the loser pay would make lawyers think twice about taking a stupid, frivolous case--like $67 mill for lost pants or that stupid woman who sued McD's b/c she spilled hot coffee and burned herself.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,917
    [QUOTE=asuusa]Why?--if the plaintiff is truly wronged and has a good case they'll win! Making the loser pay would make lawyers think twice about taking a stupid, frivolous case--like $67 mill for lost pants or that stupid woman who sued McD's b/c she spilled hot coffee and burned herself.[/QUOTE]


    McDonald's screwed themselves in that case. That lady wasn't the first person to sue them for third degree burns from coffee. McDonald's settled out of court with a lot of other people...they should have done the same here. The lady offered to settle for 20 grand, but they offered her 800 bucks.

    Don't get me wrong. I think suing because of hot coffee is retarded. Coffee is supposed to be hot. But when you sell a billion cups of coffee a day, 20,000 wouldn't have put a dent in your coffee income for one day. They should have just cut their losses and banked on the fact that 99% of people like their coffee hot and won't sue if they are unlucky enough to spill it in their crotch...

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,417
    If the lawyer was aware of it, he/she should be disbarred.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us