Are Americans Mad?

[SM Diver]

I do plaintiff's work, which will lead some people to believe that I am an ambulance chaser. However, I don't advertise on TV, and frankly, I turn down about half the cases that come into my office for consultation.

I just wanted to make this one point: There is no one that get more "mad" or upset whenever a case like this is filed than a plaintiff's attorney. We have to deal with the fall out when we go into the court room to try a claim with merit. I spend at least 10 minutes of jury selection addressing specific cases (i.e., McDonald's coffee), to find out if it has created a bias. For those who think it's easy work, or that juries are out of control with their verdicts, go sit-in on a civil trial sometime.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

Dear Tampascott:

For the record, I'm not knocking plaintiff's attorneys or suggesting that all plaintiff's attorneys are ambulance chasers. I do have a huge problem with attorneys who demean themselves by touting the size or their awards on television, who distribute business cards through ambulance drivers, who otherwise solicit business in an undignified manner or who act in a manner that turns the legal process into some type of prize lottery. For example, bringing suit against McDonald's because the plaintiff became fat. It sounds like a class action in which the individual plaintiffs will receive very little, but counsel will bet a large check based on the class settlement.

For several years, I worked on the commercial side of a smaller (12 atty) general practice firm with a well developed plaintiffs' practice. When a PI attorney was not available, I often took the intake calls. I also provided that department with coverage and other help.

I'm not surprised that you turn down more than half of your potential cases. As a practical matter, many of the intakes I got were so outlandish that they make the fast food cases look rational. Even when the cases had some basis in reality, oftentimes the damages were insignificant when compared to the cost of obtaining the damages. People do tend to forget that contingency fee cases require significant outlays of costs in addition to an attorney's time and that the firm often advances these costs. Losing a case is more than losing your time. It means that you won't recover fees for experts, investigators, accountants, economists, etc....

I'm curious. Do you feel that attorney advertising has contributed to the rise of these ridiculous cases? What should the bar do about it? Finally, what would you think of a hypothetical case against a fast food restaurant based upon a products liability theory (failure to warn of dangers, product is dangerous when used in its intended manner).

 

[SM Diver]

Northeastwrecks once bubbled...

I'm curious. Do you feel that attorney advertising has contributed to the rise of these ridiculous cases? What should the bar do about it? Finally, what would you think of a hypothetical case against a fast food restaurant based upon a products liability theory (failure to warn of dangers, product is dangerous when used in its intended manner).

I think attorney advertising has greatly contributed to the public's poor perception of attorneys. I am not sure that it has contributed to more frivilous lawsuits, but it certainly hasn't helped. In law school, I did a paper my third year on the harm caused by attorney advertising in light of the US Supreme Court's case in Bates v. State Bar of AZ, which, if memory serves me correct was around 1976. Until then, it was legal for state bars to prohibit attorney advertising on tv, billboards, etc. My home state of Florida was one of those states that did in fact prohibit it until Bates.

If you listen to the guys that do a lot of tv advertising, they will tell you that they perform a valuable service by informing the public of their right to bring a claim. IMO, that is ludicrous. I think most people know by now they have a right to bring a claim if their injured by another's negligence.

What I'd like to see is a return to the pre-Bates decision, where attorneys are hired based on their reputation in the community, not some commerical with a cheesy slogin. I disagree with the US Supreme Court's decision, and think such a prohibition is not violative of the US Constitution, because I think the state interest is compelling enough to justify the restriction.

What do I think of the case against fast food companies for obesity? I think it's absolutely ridiculous, and that a proper sanction against the attorney who filed it would be a one year suspension.

If you're ever in the Tampa Bay area to escape the harsh NE weather for a while, we'll have to hook-up for some diving and additional conversation.

 

[Northeastwrecks]

I would enjoy that. I have an infringement case pending in the Middle District of Florida. Its being run out of Orlando Division, but I may be in your area for depos and inspection of the accused devices. I'll PM you when I've got my schedule firmed up.

 

[MSilvia]

No offense, but McDonalds and Burger King both offer suprisingly fresh and tasty salads, which I've found to be quite filling. No one who goes to those places out of "necessity" and orders a jumbo double bacon cheeseburger with super size fries, a 32oz Coke and an apple pie has anyone to blame for their diet but themselves.

I agree that Americans typically have very demanding schedules, but I still don't know anyone who doesn't have time for 100 jumping jacks somewhere in their day. Again, not doing them is a matter of personal choice.

For the record, I'm an overweight American. I just take responsibility for my own choices and acknowledge that it's a result of having a cookie with lunch, a few beers at night, and preferring to sit anywhere but my rowing machine when I watch the Simpsons. Blaming it on societal pressure and McDonalds is a cop-out.

capnvik once bubbled...
Americans are not "mad" because they did not take responsibility for getting into bad eating habits themselves, but because we let ourselves get cornered into lifestyles where we feel helpless to do anything other than coast by on the least common denominator.

the only way they can eat at all is to drive thru the drive-in at the fast-food outlet.

The people in our country who subsist on fast food often do so because they can't afford an apartment with a kitchen or the time to cook for themselves.

Before you belittle a person whose health has been compromised by fast food, try to understand that many "junk food junkies" would love to do better for themselves.

 

[MSilvia]

and if the McDonalds clerk said, "Sorry sir, but I can't serve you that... you're fat enough already." They would have been okay with that?

booga_roo once bubbled...
4 Americans are trying to sue fast food companies for letting them get fat

 

[raviepoo]

:boom:

Bah!

When I was a student I lived for a time on 86$ a week. I shared a tiny apartment in Harlem with no kitchen. I cooked rice and veggies and tofu on a hotplate and stored leftovers in a dorm-sized fridge. Between my poor paying retail job, my commute on the subway and my full load of college courses I didn't have a whole lot of free time on my hands. But I did manage to feed myself healthy food despite the lack of funds or leisure time.

A fat person who sues McDonalds because he has chosen to eat their junk food is like a john who sues a prostitute for robbing him of his innocence. It's egregious abrogation of responsibility for one's actions. It's just crazy.

capnvik once bubbled...


The people in our country who subsist on fast food often do so because they can't afford an apartment with a kitchen or the time to cook for themselves.

 

[Laurence Stein DDS]

Tampascott and Northeastwrecks.

You both make interesting reading and have restored (albeit temporarily) my faith in attorneys.

Nothing makes me cringe more than to hear one of my professional peers advertise his abilities. It's taken nearly 30 years to achieve the proficiency I currently have today. To see or hear some upstart claiming great successes really frosts me.

Not only my profession, but when I hear an ad from a doc doing Lasik surgery or cosmetic surgery, a dentist advertizing his "little blue pill" sedation or an attorney referring to stockbroker misconduct or nursing home abuse, I feel a great deal of embarrassment for that professional.

I would love to see a professional get up and say that "I'm good and you have every reason to expect expert care from me. My fees are expensive because good care isn't cheap. I don't belong to an HMO or PPO because their discounts run counter to a high level of care.

A question for all reading this thread...would YOU go to a professional simply because of an advertisement on the TV or radio? If your answer is Yes, then I have some swamp land down here in Florida I'd like to sell you--cheap, really, honest.

If either of you guys get down past Mickey's house, to Miami, we dive nearly every weekend. It will be lobster season soon too.

I've got five friends with five boats and someone is nearly always going. First timers are gratis...er, unless you croak...and then everyone on the boat will claim to have never met you. Your gonna swim with the sharks--for real.

BTW, August 11 is a Sunday this month. Try to watch the Discovery Channel. Shark Week. One of my dive buddies relives his shark bite encounter in the Bahamas last year. He's a great diver, instructor, ex commercial diver. I'll probably get Nitrox certified this Summer with him.

Wait, is that an ambulance I hear?!

Regards,

Larry Stein

 

[Northeastwrecks]

IMHO, the attorneys (I can't speak to other professions) who advertise the most aggressively are the ones to whom I would not refer my worst enemy (unless, of course, my worst enemy was suing me).

These offices become "mills" in which the case load is well into the hundreds of active cases at any given time. The cases do not get the individualized attention that they deserve. Instead, they get canned documents that receive a cursory review to make sure that they filled in the name of the current plaintiff. Because of this, critical information is not discovered. Moreover, because settling before trial is much more profitable, the cases are low-balled and the plaintiffs walk away with less than thay could have gotten from a legitimate firm.

To my knowledge, we don't have much in the way of cosmetic dentistry advertising in my area, excepting the great number of bleaching treatments available. What we do have, however, is an abundance of M.D.'s (at least I think that they are M.D's) who want to use a laser on your eyes. Once again, I question whether the ones who are advertising the most are the best ones to see, particularly since I used to represent the largest group of eye surgeons in the area and, surprise, they don't advertise.

I have no problem letting a client know up front that my time, particularly for patent litigation, is expensive and that we are worth it. I don't want to get into a case and have the client pull the plug because we've exceeded the budget. As a result, I seldom get a complaint on the bills.

Thanks for the invitation. I hope to be able to take you up on it. How far away from Orlando is Miami by car?

 

[Laurence Stein DDS]

Northeastwrecks,

Just got back from Gainesville, Fla. The drive took a little over 5 hours at 80. For reasons I don't understand, a police car got on and did between 80 and 100 mph. Needless to say, he had a huge following.

Time from Orlando would be about 3 1/2-4 hours. From Tampa, you might do better to take I 75 South rather than drive North and east on I-4 to Orlando.

We do most dives on Saturday AM and may be out all day--3 tanks. We carry full medical kits, O2, redundant radio, GPS, EPIRB, and cell phones. Many phones reach out 10+ miles from shore. If we haven't dove with a particular person, we may limit the first deeper dive--just to get an idea of what's in store.

Lunch, naps, the john are all located within swimming distance from the boat.

Regards,

Larry Stein