DEMA Seminar - How to Avoid Litigation from Scuba Intros and General Instruction

[JS1scuba]

Attorney's in the dive business are a rare breed. There are a few firms that can deal with the issues that are involved with cases as well as Lesser and Associates can. Rick is no slouch. He does his homework and works exceptionally hard for his clients - regardless of whether it's defense or plantiff's work. I know him for many years in a professional relationship.

This presentation he will be doing is pretty valuable to instructors and facilities. The Discover Scuba (Try Scuba -- whatever name you call it) ends up in more litigation than most any other type of diving. It will be an interesting presentation that professionals should attend whether or not they teach / participate in these types of diving activities.

Cheers

 

[Jax]

If anyone had asked his advice when they started dumbing down courses and removing basic skills I have a feeling the presentation I just completed would have never been written and the deaths that inspired it would not have occurred. Really is making me glad I teach the way I do and for the agency that issues my certs.

The PADI response to his presentation smells of anger, sour grapes, and a good dose of fear.

What "Presentation you just completed"? Will you share?

 

[The Chairman]

I invited Rick to this thread! Hopefully, he will join us in this discussion.

 

[ItsBruce]

To view Rick as a traitor to the industry is inappropriate. To my knowledge, he never represented the scuba industry. He may have represented people or companies that were in the industry, but to the best of my information, he never represented the industry itself. In fact, attorneys rarely, if ever, have industries as clients. That's just not how the system works.

And, as far as Rick now taking on the "industry," the simple answer is that the "industry" asked for it by setting "standards" and engaging in "practices" that are unreasonably dangerous.

 

[Thalassamania]

Rick and his firm where, for many years, seemingly the only firm that got any defense work, I don't know if they were on retainer "to the industry" or engaged case, by case, but there was little or any distinction between the two.

 

[ItsBruce]

Based on my knowledge of how "defense work" works and on how insurance companies assign cases to counsel, I'm pretty sure that Rick was not "on retainer," but rather was hired on a case-by-case basis. It is also a pretty good bet that he was hired by insurance companies when one of their policyholders was sued. It is common, if not universal, that insurance companies have "approved" firms to whom they assign cases. There may be only one or two "approved" firms doing scuba cases, so it might look like Rick was the "go-to guy." There is nothing wrong with taking a job that is adverse to someone who didn't have the good sense to hire you first.

 

[Thalassamania]

It was just interesting 'cause he NEVER showed up on the plaintiffs' side.

 

[ItsBruce]

The fact that he was never on the plaintiffs' side can easily be explained by him having been fully occupied working on the defense side. However, there are two critical, related realities to keep in mind. First, most defense legal work is funded by the defendants' insurance companies. Second, over the last 10 or 12 years, insurers have become increasingly stingy and have tried to save themselves money by hiring second-rate lawyers to defend their insureds. It is not that they seek second-rate lawyers. Rather, their fee structures and the way they treat the attorneys working for them have caused many of the best lawyers to decline insurance defense work in favor of plaintiff contingency work. Good lawyers can make very good livings representing plaintiffs on a contingency fee basis. Because they are good, they attract good cases. And, because they are good and attract good cases, they win. Remember that if the plaintiff does not win, the lawyer does not get paid or reimbursed for costs, so the lawyer had better be good or he will starve. Lawyers at risk of starving because they are not good enough to get good cases or to win those that they get, must content themselves with working for the insurance companies. Of course, this makes it easier for the good lawyers who are representing plaintiffs, to win.

It is a reality that I've seen this too many times to count.

 

[Scott L]

It was just interesting 'cause he NEVER showed up on the plaintiffs' side.

Attorneys who are at or near the apex in their feild generally are referred and accept only the most egregious cases that often require much finacial resources in order to bring the case to a satisfactory conclusion. I doubt he is going to lauch a jihad against the industry with a rush of suits....

 

[The Chairman]

Judging by his cars, he is one of the few peeps to get rich off of Scuba Diving! More power to him!