Obviously, this isn't as controversial as you thought, Jumper. [img]wink.gif[/img]
Cool but also troubling...
Doctors refuse to treat lawyers who represent medical malpractice claims.....
I sympathize with the docs on this one. Sorry Lew!
Obviously, this isn't as controversial as you thought, Jumper. [img]wink.gif[/img]
I heard Michael Deadhead whining about this on the drive home. But as I've long-argued, tort reform will never occur in the form of damage caps. If you want to really improve things, change the rules of jury selection. Make it almost impossible for people to get out of jury duty. That way, you're guaranteed to get a nice mix of people who are educated, who work for a living, you know, the kind of people who always seem to get out of jury duty as it is now.
Much of the time, when you see these ridiculously high jury verdicts, they came from jurors who otherwise would be home watching daytime talk shows.
Um, Lew.
I work for a Scrooge. Jury duty for me would be unpaid. If I (again) had jury duty and had to think about my daily wage ($1.50) against the $0.25 the county will (ahem) pay me, I'll get out of it.
Nope, gotta side with Jumper on this. There are lawyers (none on this board, though) who seem to think that if I get melanoma in 20 years and the doc who removed a mole today didn't see it, I'm entitled to 40 gazillion bucks.
Greedy, scum-sucking lawyers. Present company excepted, of course.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by gae:
That being said, I'm puzzled by the fact that the nurse in the article worked double shifts because of a nursing shortage, and yet she couldn't find another job for months.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think the point being made was that as there was only one other hospital in her geographic area and that the two hospitals surely communicate that her firing from one made it difficult to find a job at the other even though there is a serious nursing shortage going on right now.From the article:
It took her until November to find work at Longview's only other hospital. Marty Leewright says his wife's experience has been difficult. "All the nursing students know about what's happened to her," he says. "It's just like a cloud that follows her around."
Two words: Tort Reform
That being said, I'm puzzled by the fact that the nurse in the article worked double shifts because of a nursing shortage, and yet she couldn't find another job for months.
Two things that could make this country much better than it is now:
1. Tort Reform
2. Campaign Finance Reform
Just about all current evils in this country can be traced back to one of these two issues. IMHO
I also agree with gae. Nursing shortage, fantastic job evaulations....long time between finding job. Curious!
<font color="#000002" size="1">[ June 14, 2004 12:13 PM: Message edited by: Jumper69 ]</font>
I understand, Gae, but therein lies the problem. Jury duty is a burden on those who work. But it's a much bigger problem without them. When you have a jury of Oprah-holics, there's gonna be problems. Logic and reason will mean nothing to them, it will be all emotional. And when Stan Chesley gets up and says "Mommy won't be able to hold her baby this Christmas, how do you put a value on that?" well, it's time to pony-up the checkbook.
I'm telling you all, caps on damages are not the answer (fine, cap attorney's fees, that's a little different). But if you give the insurance companies something they can figure in actuarily, they'll just treat it as a cost of doing business. It becomes a sort of "acceptable" casualty rate.
I just got a jury selection notice in the mail. I can pretty much promise you I won't have to serve though. Why?:
1. I'm college educated.
2. My brother in law is a cincinnati cop
3. I'm capable of recognizing a snow job when I hear one; from the prosecutor AND the defense counsel.
4. My company pays for Jury duty.
July 12th.
What think Lew? Will I have to serve?
I agree that prosecutorial snowjobs are an outrage.
Now, as for the defense side....I prefer to think of it as keeping the wheels of American justice lubricated.....
I doubt you'll serve on the criminal side because of the police connection.
But don't get me wrong, my critique of the jury process isn't limited to the jurors. I believe the lawyers should have less leeway. You find 18 people who have no connection to the case. You strike 3, I strike 3, and then we go. None of this jury questionaire crap. None of this juror consulting business.
It won't happen because too much money is at stake.
And no, I doubt you serve, unless it's a contract case. You also work for "industry," I doubt you'd sit on a tort case.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks