Gun distributor sues teacher's widow for legal fees

The Florida Times-Union ^ | July 26, 2003 | Associated Press

[FSPress]

Your pal Sarah Brady is calling for you.

[shhrubbery!]

Circuit Judge Jorge Labarga
His is a name to remember.

We should already be remembering it from Bush v. Gore (2000).

Remember how those Palm Beach Flori-duh voters demanded a "re-vote" because they claimed they were confused by the "butterfly ballot"?

Judge Labarga ruled that he had no constitutional authority to order a "re-vote" due to use of the butterfly ballot. --see here

[shhrubbery!]

wound up with a JNOV awarded by a prostituting judge

A "prostituting judge"? Prostituting what, or to whom?

Sounds like a principled judge to me. See post #42.

[wjcsux]

What part of "Shall not be infringed" don't you understand? If you want a government that controls guns, move to Cuba!

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I found out that I spoke too soon.

My understanding is that he is historically good, and that there isn't a snowball's chance in hell he'll award fees, which is only right.

[Bluntpoint]

I am a former attorney who no longer practices because of the mess the legal system is in and the caliber of attorneys out there.

I ran into more bad attorneys than good.

Moral relativism runs rampant today in the practice of law. Arrogance abounds.

I would counsel my children to be towel boys at a whorehouse before I would let them waste their time at Law School. Which by the way is a waste of 3 years. It should take at most 1 year.

The redundant case method is tedious and without need. Learn how to read cases in one semester and teach the black letter law the rest of the year.

Lawyers don't produce anything. They look for a transmission of wealth and try to figure a way to interfer in that stream.

I practiced for about 15 years. I have only one friend who is an attorney and his moral and ethical blindness at times scares me.

If you wish, I will provide you with my bona fides via private mail.

[Woahhs]

I wonder how sympathetic her ambulance chaser will be now that HER butt is in the sling.

Lawsuit leeches take note

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[Bluntpoint]

First he should award fees.

Second, JNOV was the only proper finding after a case where a form of jury nullification takes place.

[Bluntpoint]

First he should award fees.

Second, JNOV was the only proper finding after a case where a form of jury nullification takes place.

[Bluntpoint]

Wow! I must have really meant what I said!

[Bluntpoint]

Where is the disincentive for this lawyer to bring another such silly ass nuisance suit?

Nowhere.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

This whole "fee awarding" thing presents some interesting scenarios, however, that the insurance defense industry doesn't like. In this country, as you know, fees are only awarded as a sanction for discovery abuse or for suits or pleadings which are frivolous from the onset.

But what do you do when an insurance defense firm sets out to starve out a plaintiff, and chooses to roll the dice, forcing plaintiffs to spend hundreds of hours engaging in costly discovery? Shouldn't a plaintiff then get fees, especially in a damage capped environment?

[Bluntpoint]

Awarding fees goes both ways.

File a frivilous suit: Pay attorneys fees and expenses.

Mount a frivilous defense or otherwise abuse the process for reasons of extortion: Pay attorneys fees and expenses.

I believe any party that abuses the legal process should be sanctioned.

That would take care of both plantiff and defendant prostitute legal teams.

The foremost reason I quit my practice is I just got sick of telling people with great cases it was not worth their time because the process would cost them more the award.

The system today is ripe with extortion artists with absolutely no regulation.

[MissAmericanPie]

I like it, the poor little widow should pay for the trouble she has caused.

[Farnham]

You are right. I wasn't fair.

It also isn't fair that doctors must give up delivering babies even though they have never had a problem. The collective cost of malpractice suits weighs so heavily they cannot continue to practice.

It also isn't fair that good drivers and homeowners and business owners are saddled with higher insurance costs because every ambulance chaser is trying to strike it rich.

It isn't fair that I have to pay for title insurance when I purchase land (not to mention that I MUST hire a lawyer to close) instead of the lawyer being responsible for the accuracy of the search like he was 30 years ago.

It isn't fair that a burger will cost 9 bucks if the current trend in lawsuits plays out like the plantiffs hope.

And whether you hate smokers or not, it isn't fair that a pack costs $3 to $7 while some lawyers are getting billions (that's with a "B".)

What makes lawyers so special that they shouldn't have to bear the costs of business like everyone else? The view from here is that if there are so many good lawyers, why aren't they cleaning up the profession? I never see a word about anyone trying. The rest of us are practically helpless when faced with an unscrupulous lawyer. We will sooner or later take matters into our own hands, and if the courts are denied to us because we can't find an honest lawyer who is willing to fight his dirty bretheren, what's the difference if we kill 'em all?

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Show me a judge who would nut up enough to take care of the abuse, and you'll be showing me a guy who is either terminally ill with plans to die in office, or one who is ready to retire.

[Bluntpoint]

No, not in today's environment.

That is why we need tort reform.

We need an entire new system that more closely models the English Loser pays system.

Loser covers both Plaintiff and Defendant losses and abuses.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I could go for allowing the jury to decide who should pay the fees after rendering the initial verdict - each side could then present their fee tallies and the negotiation history on the claims.

[Bluntpoint]

That or a separate board of arbitration who may have a better handle on litigation abuses.