Pants Rant!!

This is a follow-up to a previous post on the Pants case. The author of the linked article makes the same argument as I do that the outcome of this case demonstrates that our Civil Justice System truly works. When I handle auto accident cases or slip and fall cases or defective product cases, there is always the risk that they will ultimately be dismissed. However, the think the true key in being a successful lawyer is choosing which cases to fight. Frivolous cases should never be allowed to get to a jury and they usually don't. However, once a jury is allowed to hear a case, 99% of the time it's not frivolous. So, I must ask then why do tort reform advocates want to limit award amounts "to stop frivolous lawsuits"? With all the procedural safeguards in place, if a jury is allowed to decide a case, by definition it's not frivolous. Any time you hear a tort reformer or someone from the Corporate Nation propose damage caps to stop frivolous lawsuits, understand that their definition of a frivolous lawsuit is ANY lawsuit, whether it has merits or not.

Tire Recalled Thanks to Pa Lawyer

Here's a link to a story about Pa lawyer, Jeffrey Killino, who filed a defect tire case against a Chinese manufacturer. Due to the filing of the lawsuit and Attorney Killino's proof that the tire was defectively made, the manufacturer may recall all of the tires. This is a perfect example of how these cases save lives. So, once again, if you hear anyone talk about limiting lawsuits or tort reform, think about this case. Think about all of those defective tires roaming the roads. Think about all those lives being saved due to one trial lawyer. This is why I do what I do.

Pants Case Dismissed!! Tort Reformers Sad!!

Breaking News!! The pants case was dismissed by the Judge. Rightly so. But the point to take from this rediculous case is that the system worked....and works. Frivolous cases always get dismissed under our civil justice system. So any time you hear of someone talking about our civil justice system is broken and they use this case as an example....throw back in their face and point out that the systems works just fine! Nuff said.

More news on previous post about diversity in Plaintiff's law firms

This is a follow-up article on the lack of diversity in Plaintiff's law firms.

Nice Editorial re. why TortReformers are in bed with Big Business.

Here's a nice editorial by friend and former co-employee, Matt Crosby, who's an outstanding attorney in Harrisburg. Read his letter.....its why I do what I do.

Wiley Rein, Insurer Sanctioned $1.25 Million

N.Y. federal judge hands down penalty over undisclosed World Trade Center insurance document. Article is from Law.com. Why does it seem like it's always insurance company defense lawyers that are hiding/destroying documents? I never hear of a plaintiff's lawyer doing this.

Things Lawyers Say That They Soon Regret!

This is from a book called Disorder in the American Courts, and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and now published by court reporters who had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were actually taking place. Not sure if any of these are true but they sure are funny. If true, they are examples of lawyers not paying attention to the answer but paying attention to what question they're going to ask next. ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active? WITNESS: No, I just lie there. ____________________________________________________________________ ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact? WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks. ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all? WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory? WITNESS: I forget. ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot? _____________________________________ ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning? WITNESS: He said, "Where am I, Cathy?" ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you? WITNESS: My name is Susan! ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo? WITNESS: We both do. ATTORNEY: Voodoo? WITNESS: We do. ATTORNEY: You do? WITNESS: Yes, voodoo. ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in hi s sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning? WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam? ____________________________________ ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he? WITNESS: Uh, he's twenty-one. ________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken? WITNESS: Are you shittin' me? ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th? WITNESS: &n bsp; Yes. ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time? WITNESS: Uh.... I was gettin' laid! ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: She had three children, right? WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: How many were boys? WITNESS: None. ATTORNEY: Were there any girls? WITNESS: Are you shittin' me? Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney? _______________________ _______________ ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated? WITNESS: By death. ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated? WITNESS: Now whose death do you suppose terminated it? ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual? WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard. ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female? WITNESS: Guess. _____________________________________ ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney? WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work. ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people? WITNESS: All my autopsies are performed on dead people. Would you like to rephrase that? ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to? WITNESS: Oral. ______________________________________ ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body? WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m. ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time? WITNESS: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an autopsy on him! ____________________________________________ ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample? WITNESS: Huh....are you qualified to ask that question? ______________________________________ And the best for last: ___________________ ___________________ ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor? WITNESS: & nbsp;Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar. ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless? WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

Where do most of our clients come from?

These are the towns where most of clients have come from throughout our region, whether they are automobile accidents, workers' compensation, slip and falls, serious injuries, defective products or insurance disputes like long term disability denials. Athens, PA Sayre, PA Towanda, PA Wyalusing, PA Canton, PA Troy, PA Dushore, PA LaPorte, PA Eagles Mere, PA Mansfield, PA Wellsboro, PA Montrose, PA Great Bend, PA New Milford, PA Tunkhannock, PA Blossburg, PA Elkland, PA Waverly, NY Barton, NY Owego, NY Elmira, NY Binghamton, NY Horseheads, NY Williamsport, PA

Where are the minorities in Pennsylvania's Plaintiff's Firms?

Here's a link to an article in the Legal Intelligencer regarding a darth of minorities and women in Pennsylvania's Plaintiff's firms. This was very surprising to me....and I'm not sure why. I think I had this notion that as Plaintiff firms, we specialize on helping the little guy. Our mottos is that everyone has rights which need to be protected, regardless of race, creed or sex. I guess human nature just took over and I assumed that this philosophy would carry over into the firm's hiring practices. I guess I was wrong. C&C Law, however, is half owned by a woman so we don't match the findings of the article. At the very least you would think there would be more women lawyers. Half of my graduating class was female but there were only a handful of minorities in the class. And that was 15 years ago. Where are they all working?

Thomas the Train Toys Recalled Due to Lead Paint

Even though it's been since 1972 that lead has been taken out of paint due to the negative health effects to people, especially children, it is in 2007 that a company from China has to recall Thomas the Train toys due to the company's use of lead based paint. Here's the article that lists the toys. I really can't believe this....it's 2007. One more example that explodes the myth that we should all "trust" corporations to protect our best interest and that the "market economy" with protect us and we really don't need regulation.

Borked!

Here's an editorial from the NY Times on my last post...such a hypocrit.

Bork's Version of Tort Reform

How the tune changes when the injury actually happens to you: Judge Robert Bork, one of the fathers of the modern judicial conservative movement whose nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected by the Senate, is seeking $1,000,000 in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages, after he slipped and fell at a Yale Club podium of New York City. (Read more)

90 day rule and the employer's doc?

I just posted a link to an article in the library section. The article was written by Attorney Dan Siegel and basically blows the lid off the myth of the 90 day rule. As you all probably know, under the Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act, an injured employee has to treat with a panel physician for the first 90 days or risk the carrier not paying for medical treatment with those 90 days. However, the Act and the regulations that interpret the Act put several "hoops" the employer has to jump through before it can require an employee to do this. But, most employees will just follow what the employer says and treat with a doctor who might has a significant financial arrangement witht he employer and may not have the injured employee's best interest in mind (either consciously or subconsciously). In about 98% of the time, the employer and/or the insurance company has not completed the steps necessary to hold the injured employee to the 90 day rule. So, I guess the rule is, if you're hurt at work....call me!!! Even if we don't sign you up as a client, we'll tell you what you need to do and what you don't need to do. Also, check out the newsletters in the Library section. I believe we wrote an article about this topic a few newsletters ago.

$67 million Lawsuit for Lost Pants

I'm sure you've heard of that Administrative Law Judge who filed a $67 million lawsuit against a mom and pop dry cleaners b/c they lost his pants. Well, now he's being more reasonable and lowering it to $54 million. He should be fired and disbarred for filing a lawsuit like that. It makes all of us lawyers look bad. It's hard enough with the insurance industry and corporate America spending billions (yes, with a "b") of dollars to try to convince Americans that filing a lawsuit to protect your Constitutional rights is a bad thing. But now we have this joker giving the insurance industry and the Chamber of Commerce another example to use. Just remember folks, it's people like me and other attorneys like me that protect the little guy. Insurance companies and corporations will not look out for your best interest. Their best interest is their bottom line.

Another example of how NOT to give a deposition

This highlights the lesson that every lawyer is taught (and should remember) in law school: Never ask a question that you don't already know the answer....

First Post

This is my first post on C&C Law's firm blog. My goal with this blog is to discuss issues that affect our clients, changes in the law of personal injury and workers' compensaiton and, generally, what it's like to be a partner in a partner in a law firm in a small town. I'll try to keep my politics out of it, but, hey, if I slip up, forgive me. Some of what affects our clients IS politics, such as the "tort reform" garbage that the corporate elite try to ram down everyone's throat. See? I just can't help myself, can I? Ok. This is my first lesson. How not to give a deposition.