Someone educate me: what exactly is so horrible about lawyers???

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

Specifically TRIAL lawyers, as they seem to be an especially horrible sub-type.


Seriously, I know very little about this. What exactly is the deal? So Edwards defended people against doctors who were accused of malpractice?

What's the problem here? If you can tell me from "their" perspective, I'd be ever so grateful, so I can be more informed if/when this comes up in conversation. I don't watch much TV.

[Kanary]

1. *EVERYTHING* is horrible about them

Unless you need 'em.

Kanary

[Grins]

48. A favorite of mine...

"If a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged, then a liberal is a conservative that’s been arrested."

Or, from Alan Dershowitz: "A civil libertarian is a conservative who is under investigation."

Bush and Cheney are civil libertarians?

[Racenut20]

2. They help poor people win money from corporations, and

corporations are campaign donations. The poor people who wait years in the fight to get their money do not donate it to politicians.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

8. Yet another good point....

[IronLionZion]

3. They make money off of others' misfortunes

and supposedly they raise the cost of insurance.

I like Edwards, but when wingnuts call him an ambulance chaser I just can't help laughing. These are the same wingnuts that support killing people to raise the stock value of Halliburton.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

10. And another

thank you, and yeah I can't help but wonder where their priorities are that they would vote for such big corporation guys over someone who defended the little guy.

WTF?

[IronLionZion]

16. exactly, and why do liberals hate corporations?

There are good and bad corporate executives just like there are good an bad lawyers.

I'll take our two good lawyers over those two bad corporate executives any day.

Instead of this election being thought of as businessmen vs. lawyers, it should be criminals vs. lawyers.

[lanparty]

49. They make money REDRESSING others misfortunes ...

There is little difference between a doctor and a lawyer. One takes up where the other leaves off.

Conservatives don't hate lawyers. Just ask Anne Coulter and Laura Ingraham or James Baker. They hate a PARTICULAR type of lawyer who works on contingency. That is the type of lawyer who works for people without money.

You see, without contingency these folks would never be able to afford a lawyer. Contigency lawyers take a large chunk of settlements because they will lose many of those cases. What the cons never tell you is the cost of PAYING the lawyer on retainer (like rich folk do) would often be MORE than their contingency fee in most cases.

Even more loathsome are lawyers who bundle lots of similar contingency cases into one big CLASS ACTION CASES. This negates an industries capability to force a single law firm to battle an entire industries army of lawyers. Class action lets the little guys make their own army when they have common grievances.

Now there ARE things wrong with our legal system. We DO have too many lawyers filing frivolous lawsuits. Of course, MOST of these lawsuits are filed by large corporations or rich folks against LITTLE GUYS.

A lot of times, lawyers will file suit in a "reverse contingency" method. They will file lawsuits that they KNOW are frivolous but can drag out. They attempt to force settlements out of parties in order to make the action dissappear despite there being no merit to the case (like the beef industry suing Oprah).

In these cases, it's very appropriate to fine a lawyer and force them to pay for court preceedings for their idiocy or predatory conduct. Of course, Republicans oppose THESE measures. Rather, they wish to cap the monetary awards that individuals can receive IRREGARDLESS of what the injury may be.

Of course, you won't find Republicans in favor of measures to eliminate frivolous lawsuits. THEY file most of them. They only want to limit the awards for people who are greviously injured. Nor do the Republicans want to change rules regarding "get out of jail free cards". These are position statements written by lawyers saying something that is illegal is legal. White collar criminals pay for them so they can claim ignorant due diligence in the face of complicated corporate governance/tax law.

Nope, no Republicans want to do anything about THAT. That would only hurt their clientel.

BTW, there is a sector that is hurting pretty badly from lawsuits. That sector is EDUCATION. Principals and administrators have been turned into beuracratic shells who do little more than appease the parents who threaten the most lawsuits. As a result, there in no longer any discipline in the schools. They can't kick the troublemakers out. The kids know this and it breeds even MORE troublemakers. Meanwhile they are all hurting their own educations and that of kids who are actually disciplined at home.

Whose fault is this. Well, it's obvious. In the Republican world, every education ill is due to the teachers union. REpublicans are loathe to do ANYTHING that will actually IMPROVE education like increasing class sizes and providing alternative education facilities for kids who just can't follow the rules (besides prison). Nor would they EVER back up an embattled teacher who whose biology lessons didn't include creationism.


Republicans
For the Little Guy -> Against Lawyers who stick up for the little guy
Pro Education -> Anti Educator, Anti School Spending, Against Modern Cirrculum, Against School Discipline
Pro Fiscal Discpline -> Pro Deficit Spending
Pro Troops -> Against Troop Benefits
Pro Fetus -> Anti-Infant
Pro Health -> Anti-Health Facilities, Anti Health Spending, Anti-Doctor (educated fancy pants elitists), Anti-Nurse

[DoctorWeird]

4. Criminal Lawyers

Especially defense attorneys are known for being dishonest because they are supposedly willing to defend anyone for a paycheck, even those they KNOW are guilty. Conversely prosecuters are willing to prosecute whoever just because they are told to, even if they suspect they are innocent.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

6. But hey

everyone, even those who are as guilty as the day is long, has the right to be represented by an attorney, right? Someone's gotta do it.

[Bandit]

9. What about Trial Lawyers?

You know the ones that help you out if someone hurts you in some manner. Like a landlord that kicks you out and keeps all of your belongings or a person who drives their car into your house and they have no insurance. There are more kinds of lawyers than criminal or prosecution. A large amount of lawyers are "Trial Lawyers" whether they ever enter a courtroom or not. Remember we are a nation of Laws and that means lawyers.

[DoctorWeird]

11. Yeah, it's the same people who hate lawyers

That call us "bleeding heart liberals." It's just permeated culture, just as the word "liberal" has become a part of hate-speech.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

14. "Liberal" is the HIGHEST of compliments

I call myself a liberal. It's not an insult if anyone tries to use it on me. I'm liable to hug someone who calls me that!

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

12. I'm glad we have lawyers and

the right to be represented in court by an attorney in this country.

I think this Edwards argument is going to sink--in fact, I'm sure it already has. A lot of people I have talked to who are undecided still just shrugged their shoulders and said "meh" when I asked them if they cared that Edwards was a lawyer. Several told me they didn't understand why that would be such a big deal. Perfectly legitimate profession, right?

Who cares was basically their attitude.

Which is good. It doesn't seem to bother the fence-sitters I know.

[lanparty]

51. Trail lawyers are a two headed coin ...

And Republicans aren't averse to using EITHER head.

They're only averse to the tools that make the coin available to the little guy.

[Justice]

39. That Is Completely Wrong!!

Criminal Defense attorneys are known for being dishonest? How about our constitution gives everyone the right to counsel, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. How about defense attorneys representing defendants as part of our legal system -- to make the state do its job and prove its case. Even if someone committed the crime, that person is still entitled to a trial and an attorney.

Prosecuters too have a role. They represent the state, and are prosecuting the case based on evidence.

Every day defense lawyers and prosecutors go and do their job - honestly and fairly.

[Dem_4_Life]

40. Criminal Lawyers

My mother was a prosecutor here in TX for years and was actually fired for political reasons. My opinion about lawyers (I can only speak on behalf of the ones I know/know of here in TX) is that there is a big difference in where each stands on issues and on political sides.

Defense Attys: I would say about 95% of defense attys in TX are cut-throat. They will go to any means to get a guilty person off and that also includes bribes, incompetent or lying witnesses. There is one family of defense lawyers here in San Antonio (that used to chair the SA Republican party) for example that basically runs their law office like the mafia. The more money you have the more money they will hire to pay witnesses that will lie on the stand. They commonly give gifts and go out for drinks with and donate money to the judges for their campaigns to have their way in the courtroom. In the state bar journal each month there is always a list of attys that have lost their license due to illegal business deals and unethical things and about 50/50 are defense attys and cooperate attys.
**Most vote Republican**

Prosecutes: Yes, sometimes there are cases where they know the person is innocent and if there is not enough evidence then more than likely they will try to get the case dismissed. If there is plenty of evidence then they will try their best to win the case on behalf of the state. For the reasons mentioned above about the Defense Attys it is sad to say that if you have money then you will more than likely get off and not have to pay a fine or serve time in jail. There are plenty prosecutes though that act just as the defense attys and will do whatever they have to win a case.
**50% vote democrat and you have to remember they are not paid much since they work for the state about $35K a year (not much for an atty)

Trial Lawyers: I am not sure about how most work other than they fight for the average people who have been beaten down by the cooperations (enough said)
**Most vote democrat

Cooperate Attys: These are the most evil snake like attys of the group. They go after the average joe and do whatever they can to get the cooperations more money.
**Most vote Republican

[newyawker99]

42. Hi satx4kerry!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Feanorcurufinwe]

5. If you are a corporation, and you screw people over, lawyers are the folks

who will be fighting you on behalf of those people. Therefore, if you are a corporation, or some other rich, powerful interest, lawyers are a potential enemy.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

7. Ah

Gotcha! I suspected it was something like that.

WTF is wrong with BLUE COLLAR working class repukes arguing AGAINST a guy because he once defended people against big corporations?

Have we all lost our collective MINDS?

[Bandit]

13. What do those Corporations use to fight you with?

:shrug:

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

15. Attorneys

Yeah. bush and cheney have attorneys. A whole slew of them I bet.

But I bet they are repuke attorneys and not Dem attorneys.

[newscaster]

20. kEEP THIS IN MIND....

First of all, everyone who faces trial must have a competend attotney at his side. Thats the law, like it or not. Just because someone has committed a horrendous crime, it does not mean he should not have representation. The same is true for the defendant accused ot a complicated white collar crime, like the Enron scumbags. The law says they must have representation.
Now in big cities, you have the Public Defender who speaks on behalf of the poor. But not every city has a public defender. In that case, local attorneys are appointed pro bono (for free) to handle the case.
It is outright stupid to attack trial lawyers because most people, at one time or another, will need a lawyer to speak for them in court, even the super rich or the super connected.
And like you all said......a trial lawyer is the bad guy, until you need one.

[Bandit]

28. Funny thing about that

The lawyer that is representing both Bush* and Ken Lay has given all his political donations to Democrats. :shrug: Go figure

[bloom]

52. yeah - that is the funny thing

about Republicans vs. Edwards.

Seems to me the rich and powerful benefit from lawyers more than anybody. But a lawyer who successfully represents the people screwed over by some corporation is a threat. Unfortunately - they will convince many that trial lawyers work against them.

On the angle that it drives up costs of goods and services and insurance and stuff - big lawsuits could be a problem. So what is the alternative - let huge corporations do whatever they want with no consequences? Limiting damage awards to something that won't make a dent as far as some multi-national corporation is not an improvement, either.

[oldcoot]

17. Medical malpractice insurance can be expensive

The doctors in my state (Nevada) started claiming that they would no longer be able to practice medicine in the state because of having to pay so much money for medical malpractice insurance. Of course, they argued that a cap on medical malpractice lawsuits would take care of the problem. Many people supported this idea because they were afraid of losing their doctors and many blamed the "evil, greedy" lawyers. They probably should have blamed the evil, greedy insurance companies instead but that is another story.

[stanwyck]

19. insurance companies and their execs

make a disproportionately high amount of money compared to other industries. Yet they get away with their gluttony by blaming the lawyers. We always hear about the same outrageous lawsuits...where someone sued McDonald's. But that's hate-radio spin. Lawyers don't get nearly the slice that the corporations take. Somehow, this myth has taken hold. I blame the lies emanating from hate radio.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

21. I voted against that

when it came up here in Texas, but it passed anyway.

[TransitJohn]

29. Man, Wyoming is doing the same thing

dorks in Cheyenne just called themselves into special session for the first time in *history*, and put a proposed constitutional ammendment on the ballot, so all the fundie morons that are my fellow citizenry can take away my right to a fair trial to ensure insurance company profits. The really bad thing? Doctors are gonna keep leaving, anyway.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

31. How much is your penis worth?

That's what I always heard when that issue was on the ballot here.

A guy underwent urological surgery and woke up penis-less. Gross malpractice on the part of the doctor, but because of caps that were already in place in his state, he could only sue for.....ready for it?

$600.

Yep. His entire penis was only worth $600.

And the doctor kept on practicing.

[Kanary]

30. IF we had UNIVERSAL, SINGLE PAYER Medical Care, we'd have much

fewer lawsuits. People often have to sue just to get $$ for continuuing care. :crazy:

But, rather than opening their eyes and seeing what is needed, voters continue to shoot themselves in the foot.

When they're left footless, I guess they can sue.

Kanary

[Bake]

18. Technically they don't "defend" people against big corps.

At least not in the sense of defending a person accused of a crime.

Edwards was a plaintiffs' lawyer. He represented people who sued large corporations to recover damages for harm caused by the corporation or its products. The corporate defendants have their own trial lawyers too. A defense lawyer is a trial lawyer too; he/she can also be a member of the "big bad" Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) as an associate member.

ATLA's motto is "For the People."

Plaintiffs' lawyers are often caricatured as greedy because they take cases on a contingency fee basis, and that they file frivolous lawsuits just to try to extort a quick settlement, take their 1/3 cut and be done with it. Given that they ARE on contingency, they don't get a dime unless they win, so there is a driect incentive NOT to file frivolous lawsuits where there is little hope of recovering damages.


Believe me, if you think all you have to do is file a lawsuit and people start throwing money at you, YOU ARE WRONG. Plaintiffs' lawyers have to chase down the defendant, beat the crap out of him, and pry the money out of his fingers! Figuratively speaking, of course.

Trial lawyers are the ones out there doing their best to keep corporate America honest.

Bake, Esq.
Member of ATLA since 1996

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

22. Plus I read in either Time or Newsweek

that Edwards went to trial a LOT instead of just settling.

[DemBones DemBones]

37. Bake, who knew you were one of those

"evil trial lawyers"?! ;-)

I don't know why people are so envious of trial lawyers collecting on contingency. If they didn't take cases on contingency, many (most?) plaintiffs could never afford to have their case heard.

Someone I know had a cardiac catheterization done earlier this year and the physician screwed up big time. She developed a blood clot and had a heart attack shortly after the procedure and her life was saved by the action of quick-thinking nurses. They tried to get the doctor back to treat her and he refused to come, though he was still in the hospital. He was subsequently fired but may have gone on to practice elsewhere.

The patient can't work now and has pain all down her leg (from the incision.) Financially, things are bad for them. But they haven't even called a lawyer. How many people who deserve financial compensation for undeniable damages never do call a lawyer? Or call one who isn't interested in the case and then give up? It takes a long time to get to trial once you do get a lawyer and may involve real nastiness from the other side attempting to intimidate you.

[MikeG]

23. I've been one for 20 years. Here are the reasons I've heard.

1. If you get divorced, your ex has one. You'll hate that one.

2. If you don't pay your bills, one will sue you.

3. If you hire one, they'll charge you a lot of money.

4. When a relative dies, one will probate the will. You may not like what they have to tell you about what you were left, or the taxes that have to be paid first.

5. Not all of my colleagues are responsive enough to their client's needs, i.e return calls.

6. We can be such smart asses.

To sum up, at almost every bad event in your life, you'll run across a lawyer.

[Yupster]

41. My complaints against lawyers

1. Estate attorneys who make themselves heirs to the estate. My aunt died with an estate of about 1.5 million. She had everything well organized, so it was very easy on us all. For the attorney, it was a matter of getting the paperwork signed by the right people. There were no complaints or problems. The attorney charged us 2.5 % of the estate (though apparently not on the property), so his fee came out to a cool $ 26,000. Not bad for some paperwork. He got more than many of the heirs that my aunt wanted to give money to. Is there an excuse for taking advantage of people like this?

2, Lawyers who file class action lawsuits over nonsense. I've now been in three class action suits. In my opinion all were nonsense. One was a mortgage company which was being accused of keeping more than was necessary in their escrow account . The result was the company agreed to pay everyone the interest due on the overage though they admitted no fault. I got about a dollar and a quarter. The lawyer made 25 % of the settlement or about $ 1.4 million.

A second case I was in was over an annuity I owned. A lawyer claimed something wasn't clear enough in the prospectus. The company agreed to give each contract holder (now get this) one year's worth of accidental death and dismemberment insurance. Mine was for $ 1,400. Luckily I didn't die that year, so my benefit was worthless. Who knows how much the scheister lawyer got, but the case involved hundreds of thousands.

I'm in another one now as a stockholder of a grocery store. I've been told the company will settle and I will get an award of less than $ 5. The company also agreed the lawyers will get no more than 25 % of the total award. Since as a stockholder of the company, am I supposed to see this any other way than me just giving money to a lawyer?

Then there are the lawyers who jump into a case having done nothing right before settlement. The tobacco case was a prime example of this. Just be related to a politician, and you could jump into the settlement regardless of whether you actually worked on the case or not.

These are some of the complaints I have against some lawyers.

I haven't even gotten to my doctor friend who used to deliver babies, but now just does ObGyn work.

[lanparty]

50. Lawyer is the alternative to soldier ....

Without lawyers, we'd all be formed up into clans fighting each other over squabbles. I'd take the lawyers any day.

Law is the foundation of civil society. Lawyers are the unescapable result of law.

[IndianaGreen]

24. All lawyers are assholes!

And they are very proud of being assholes (they also love lawyers' jokes).

As a matter of fact, it takes an asshole to make a good lawyer.

I count some of them as my friends!

[MikeG]

25. I prefer people withhold their judgment on my assholery...

until they at least get to know me.

[IndianaGreen]

27. We must have a drink to find that out!

:toast:

[MikeG]

32. One of these days.

[leesa]

26. They go after rich corporations when they harm people

THAT'S the problem with them.

[Obamarama]

33. Whats the difference between a lawyer and a vulture?

Lawyers wear wingtips.

[Gothmog]

34. Trial attorneys tend to support Democrats

Repugs hate trial attorneys because most trial attorneys tend to support Democrats heavily and because the GOP is aligned with the interests of the companies who are sued by trial attorneys.

A good trial attorney can make a very good living but there is a great deal of risk involved. Every contingency case involves a great deal of risk as to both proving liability and then collecting from the defendant. My firm has a large judgment on a contingent fee case for securities fraud that we will not collect because the Fifth Cir. just invalidated the directors and officers insurance due to the "bad acts" of one of the defendants. This is horrible law but that is what happens when you have conservatives on the bench. My firm took a risk and we lost.

I have another set of clients who are being screwed by a new tort reform law in Texas that has cut their recovery greatly by retroactively changing the rate of prejudgment interest. This law was changed to hurt trial lawyers and their clients and it is just plain unfair.

[DemBones DemBones]

35. The GOP claims that only the lawyers who

work to help corporations or the "haves" get money are "good," while those who sue corporations or the "haves" on behalf of a person and thus help that person get money in return for damages are "bad."

This is why you hear GOP politicians insist "We need tort reform." I heard Bush* say it last time he appeared live on my tv, just in the short time it took me to get up and get the remote control.

Would tort reform help you and me? Not likely. As I understand it, the "haves" are disgusted with juries awarding large amounts of money to someone who's been damaged through someone else's negligence or incompetent. These decisions may be made against a corporation which manufactured and/or sold a defective product, a physician who was negligent or incompetent (and whose insurance company has to pay), etc. Tort reform would not prevent corporate negligence or physician incompetence but would make it more difficult, or impossible, for the damaged to collect for their suffering.

[Amaya]

36. My lawyer was/is GREAT!

Never had a bad experience with one.

[kodi]

38. its the human sacrifices of babies. that is a bit much

.

[liveoaktx]

43. Bush would have been one too-he was rejected by UT Law School

[AngryAmish]

44. Mostly their breath

[Tracer]

45. I've only had one experience with lawyers ...

... and I really can't extrapolate a generalization from that experience, but ...

I was the victim of a phony and malicious lawsuit by my former employers after I left the company.

The only result of which was my lawyer and the company's lawyer sending each other boilerplate letters. My lawyer sends one ... the other lawyer replies. My lawyer sends another one ... the other lawyer sends another reply.

At one point, my lawyer handed me yet another letter to look over and I saw that he (or his secretary) hadn't even bothered to replace my name in the boilerplate with a previous client's name.

What nonsense.

And it cost me $3,000.

[lectrobyte]

46. evil lawyers: it's a myth started by big corporations

to prevent the public from fighting back. No doubt there are some frivolous lawsuits, but Edwards was involved in a famous case here when a little girl had her intestines sucked out by a swimming pool pump system. Even the famous McD's case of the woman (who got 3rd degree burns) and the coffee misses the point that McD's coffee was way hotter than coffee needs to be, and they had numerous previous complaints and lawsuits about this. I think corporate America would be much happier if we'd all just conform and consume, and don't worry our pretty little heads over lawsuits.

[TX-RAT]

47. Their lousy poker players

At least the one's in our game are.