Time for Tort Reform? Check this out...

by JWoods 116 Replies latest social current

• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Robdar writes:

  "I've never done anything so drastic that I had to pay him/her $640.00 an hour to save my rear end. However, both attorneys were worth the money I paid them ..." (Emphasis added)

  Neither have I done anything so drastic that I had to pay a lawyer $640 bucks an hour to save my rear end. Your response evidences a narrow and inexperienced view.

  Let me ask you a question. Have you ever had several million dollars tied up in a legitimate business that was jeopardized by a threat of restaint of trade? If not then you have never experienced the sort of legal fees involved with fighting such a beast. You do not have to do anything in such an instance as this to need the services of a well trained and experienced lawyer. You only have to be in the wrong business place at the right time, and be the victim of a wannabe/trying-to-be monopoloy. Even if you win the fight, you are a million lighter than you began, if not lighter.

  Because we need lawyers and because we hire lawyers does not mean we like lawyers. We live in a legalistic society. Lawyers are, essentially, trained to teach people how to work and squeeze the system to their advantage. Like or dislike, moral or immoral, has nothing to do with it. At worst lawyers teach the leaches in society to better suck our blood. When an attorney provides services we need and on our behalf, more often than not it has nothing whatsoever with trying to help us; it is about the money. I will note, however, that there are lawyers whose compelling drive is about helping and giving rather than taking. These attorneys are likable, but they do not tend to have a lucrative business. But then, that is not what these are in it for.

  Note to the weary, I do not dislike lawyers or think less of lawyers because they tend to be expensive to hire. Just like me, they take advantage of whatever is the current market demand. Hell, I get a better fee than the average lawyer so far as I know. My point is that hiring someone (e.g., a lawyer, or me!) because we need their services is not about liking or disliking.

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  David writes:

  "I am struggling to know how to respond to such an intellectual as yourself, however would you please indulge me, i generally find that getting along with people ( especially those to whom i pay my hard earned cash) helps. I know you do not have to like them, that i never questioned. nothing whatsoever to do with liking them, did i say that it did?."

  All you have to do is respond to what is actually said, rather than something that is not said.

  My response (that you responded to earlier) was addressing a notion that hiring a lawyer has something to do with liking or disliking a lawyer (or lawyers). It does not. If you were not disputing or addressing my point then what was the point of your response? Like any educated person, when someone takes the time to reply to something I write then I presume they have taken time to understand the point of what I wrote. Hence I respond as though they were replying to my point. Assuming your reply was in the presence of an understanding of my point, then your reply was a red herring. So why write it?

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  Robdar

  Have you ever had several million dollars tied up in a legitimate business that was jeopardized by a threat of restaint of trade? If not then you have never experienced the sort of legal fees involved with fighting such a beast. You do not have to do anything in such an instance as this to need the services of a well trained and experienced lawyer. You only have to be in the wrong business place at the right time, and be the victim of a wannabe/trying-to-be monopoloy. Even if you win the fight, you are a million lighter than you began, if not lighter.

  Oh, man. What a pisser. No. I haven't been involved in anything personally (allah be praised) but I know what you speak of.

  The first law firm I worked for handled a wetlands case that was down right scary. The US Government (under Clinton) went after this couple in a way that made me think of the mob. That case went on for years. It was still winding its way through the court system when I left that law firm.

  The thing that bothered me was the couple was assumed guilty until proven innocent. I am pretty sure the case broke them financially. And you are correct, they didn't so anything to be in the position they were in. I wonder who won that case.

  Law is an interesting profession. There are times you win and times you lose. Winning makes you feel so good and the celebratory beer tastes even better.
• 

  beksbks

  There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

  BTS

  Good Morning Burn!! Do Randians worship on Saturday?
• 

  Robdar

  Do Randians worship on Saturday?

  The Jews do.

  ~Gives a slice of Challah to Beks~

  Want peanut butter with it? Eat, eat. It's good for you.

  
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Robdar writes:

  "I am pretty sure the case broke them financially. And you are correct, they didn't so anything to be in the position they were in."

  Chances are the couple did not like their attorney, before, during or after (particularly afterward). Needing a lawyer has nothing to do with liking or disliking a lawyer. When I hire an attorney, frankly, I look for the most experienced and successful rattlesnake I can find. My hope is my foe will end up thinking my hired-gun is a worse SOB than I do. At least then I feel like I got my money's worth!

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  llbh

  Marvin,

  You like to insult people and be rude to them, (me included), then ask me to read your posts, which i have, yet you fail to extend the same courtesy. It is either that, or we are misunderstanding each other.

  Your approach seems to be confrontational rather than collegiate.

  My belief is that often the award system in some instances needs looking into, particularly in the US. That being said the Oil company BP has just been fined a record in the amount for safety issues at its Texas plant, this is an example of where the law can be useful in encouraging safe practice, it aslo leads to increased profitability too.

  Regards David