Posted on 02/26/2005 7:41:55 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick
Nationally, defendants prevail in nearly 80 percent of the medical malpractice cases that go to trial.
Wouldn't that seem to suggest that far too many frivolous lawsuits are making it to court?
Experimental lab rat gets my vote.
Come on everyone who is reading this message..please please give money to this low life attorney so that he won't have to lay off one of his two live-in chefs..don't forget all that these scumbags contribute to our lives..higher insurance rates..less access to affordable medicine..oh I could go on..but you get my drift..even if you don't contribute..you already have..thank you..
If this bill doesn't put paid to the trial lawyers, we can always go for another bill a little further down the line. Take away a billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon it adds up to real money.
There ought to be some sort of disclosure of conflict of interest by the Times. The writer mentions, at the very bottom of the article, that this sleazebag gave $100,000 in campaign donations in the last election, all to Democrats. Trial lawyers are the largest single donor group to Democrats nationwide. For that reason, Pinch Sulzberger and the NY Times would be devastated if these folks lost any of their income, because it would cut into Democrat campaign contributions. For that reason, too, they do not consider that these ultra-rich lawyers belong to the group commonly denominated as capitalist pigs.
God's speed on this one, Mr. President. This country is in MAJOR NEED OF JUDICIAL REFORM, INCLUDING TORT REFORM that has put a stranglhold on this country. In doing this, causing judicial reform, you put a choke-chain ON THE LEFT'S MAIN TOOL FOR PUSHING THEIR PERVERTED AGENDA... the judicial system.
ping
Well good, Mr. Smith.Then you surely will not mind if President Bush trims your sails a bit.
The whole article is WAY TOO EASY on crooked lawyers. They find ways past the caps on % mentioned and routinely try to get outrageous judgements out of moron juries that they purposely select. I was on a jury in California where it was obvious that not only was the plaintiff not injured on the defendants property, it was also obvious that he was injured in a drug-related motorcycle accident. In fact, the plaintiff and his windbag lawyer presented no hard evidence whatsoever, just histrionics and tears. Had it not been for a few IQs above room temp on the jury the lawyer and his scumbag client would have ripped off a family business for $2.5M in an absolute SCAM. When you see the legal system up close you understand how sick it really is.
Divide and conquer.
This and conservative courts would be a huge victory for the good guys.
This article fails to make an easy point.
If damages are capped then lawsuits that have no chance of winning will not go to trial.
And...
Those supposed costs for research are bound to go down. Those people are getting paid a serious amount of money because there is plenty of work for them.
If there is less work obviously costs will go down in order to make the venture profitable.
If these so called experts want to get paid for any testimony at all they will be forced to lower their costs... if not they make nothing.
I think I'm getting all teared up....gotta sign off now and recover.
L
Oooh, this is going to be fun!
bflr
You answered your own question. Break up the war against tort lawyers into bite sized pieces, and win it victory by victory.
"Medical malpractice lawyers are cast as the marquee villains in the administration's war against what it regards as a litigious culture run amok."
Sounds right to me. Thanks for the ping, Calpernia!
Me, too, I make a 7 figure income. Unlike Lawyer Smith, however, I have a decimal point somewhere in those figures.
Don't we just love the way the outrageous "pain and suffering" awards are lumped in with the actual damage awards? Whenever I read about lawyers, I get the strong impression that real justice is irrelevant to them--it's all about putting on the best show and winning the case. I could never be so dishonest.
One has to wonder how that will affect the attorney's votes in 2008. There are a large wealthy lobby.
Sounds like a good plan, break up the war bit by bit, victory by victory.
As part of the war on legal reform, I'd like to see congress reverse the 'law' they put in place sometime back and take away all funding of legal cases for ACLU and their ilk. This would save a lot of taxpayers dollars both in legal and court fees. If they believe so strongly in all these ridiculous suits they're bringing forward, let them fund them. I have opposed almost every one they've done (especially wrt the 10 Commandments, etc.) and I don't want my hard-earned tax $s going to them, I'd rather the $s be used to give the military a raise or help their families.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.