Lawyers Evil or Saints?

[northcoast_diver]

The worst case of legal abuse that I have ever seen with my own eyes was by 2 admins who worked in a lawfirm. They had figured out that if they could get anybody's insurance number, the ins co would settle any frivilous claim. They tried it on a neighbor of mine. He was smart. He would not give them any info.

Anyone can sue you for any reason or non-reason.

The key is to fight the complaint and not accept a settlement offer.

So much for the irrelevant issue posed by the thread so far.

More relevantly, for scuba, if you teach or D/M, and there is an injury of any kind, no matter who's fault it is, expect to get sued. That is why we pay for instructor insurance.

I don't know of any cases where a dive buddy got sued.

But remember that anyone can sue anybody for any reason.

"So sue me!"

 

[Seabear70]

And here I thought this was the Lawyer slam thread!

Yeah, and I also would not have put this thread in "Non-Diving Related Stuff" either, but nobody asked me.

 

[H2Andy]

Looks to me like it was a lawyer who split this into it's own thread, making seabear's post the first one. A lawyer who named it. And renamed it. And renamed it yet again. A lawyer who responded to the posts. Am I wrong again?

you are right, but you miss the point, per usual

also, we all know your *cough cough* neutral stance on this
subject... ahem...

so.. Snow... do you think lawyers are evil? that we are to blame
for the state of the world? that we are leeches sucking dry
the marrow of America? i would love to hear your opinions on
this subject. :06:

 

[H2Andy]

Yeah, and I also would not have put this thread in "Non-Diving Related Stuff" either, but nobody asked me.

no, your posts about diving and liability are still in the original
post... check for yourself

the only ones i moved here were posts were diving insn't even
mentioned

i think that the current name of this thread (which you asked for)
is misleading, but hey... your call

 

[Seabear70]

you are right, but you miss the point, per usual

Ok Andy, Since you don't want to deal with or even acknoledge the issue, what exactly is your point?

Sounds to me like it's "All lawyers are good, and don't you ever mess with them or they'll ram that goodness right down your throat."

Or maybe I'm missing the point.

 

[H2Andy]

yeah, i'd say you are

not to mention totally mischaracterizing my position

but, perhaps... we are getting to know one another better,
without facades, sort of speak?

 

[Seabear70]

this sounds highly improbable, given the rules and regulations
as to what attorneys may or may not arrange with their
clients as to payment (basically, you have contingency or
flat fee, period).

i would ask you to put up or shut up: find the source and get it
right or stop spouting things you half-understand.

Well, here's part of it...

http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html

I couldn't find a transcript of the interview with her, but there are obviously a couple of ways that lawyers could be owed more than the settlement.

One is if the person is unable to work, often a lawyer will loan them money to get by until the settlement comes in. Naturally there is intrest involved. Unfortunately often times the intrest is high enough that when the settlement comes in, the client is in debt for life.

Feel free to deny that.

 

[Seabear70]

yeah, i'd say you are

not to mention totally mischaracterizing my position

but, perhaps... we are getting to know one another better,
without facades, sort of speak?

Ok, then what was your point?

 

[H2Andy]

One is if the person is unable to work, often a lawyer will loan them money to get by until the settlement comes in. Naturally there is intrest involved. Unfortunately often times the intrest is high enough that when the settlement comes in, the client is in debt for life.

i don't know if to laugh or cry. dude, you're scaring me.

not only is what you are saying (usury) not permitted under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and the Model Code of Professional Responsibility (versions of which are eneacted in every US State), but also against the Bar Rules of every state in the Union.

some further reading:

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_1_5.html

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/ethics/mcpr.pdf

 

[H2Andy]

Ok, then what was your point?

my point is that you seem to have a simplistic view of the world in general and lawyers in particular, and that your beliefs are based on half-facts, semi-truths, and a lack of understanding of how the world in general and the legal profession in particular functions.