Mesothelioma...any end to it?

[glynndah]

The John Grisham novel in question is more likely The Appeal. "In Mississippi, a jury returns a shocking verdict against a chemical company accused of dumping toxic waste into a small town's water supply, causing the worst "cancer cluster" in history."

 

[Stella_Omega]

The John Grisham novel in question is more likely The Appeal. "In Mississippi, a jury returns a shocking verdict against a chemical company accused of dumping toxic waste into a small town's water supply, causing the worst "cancer cluster" in history."

Sounds like corporate manslaughter is a recurring theme for Grisham, huh?

I was thinking about this; squarejohns buddy got six thousand dollars. That's chump change if he'd gotten sick. I know ami, for instance feels that it's better that the innocent sufferers suffer more if that prevents a few scammers from profiting by the recompense effort. As always, that thought process isn't even worth addressing, it's so inhuman and alien.

But squarejohn might be a bit different, he might be concentrating on that purloined(in his opinion) six grand without looking at any other part of this problem. Maybe he can be persuaded to look at a bigger picture.

Maybe not.

 

[trysail]

The John Grisham novel in question is more likely The Appeal. "In Mississippi, a jury returns a shocking verdict against a chemical company accused of dumping toxic waste into a small town's water supply, causing the worst "cancer cluster" in history."

Mmmmm, my bet would be on The King of Torts. In that novel, Grisham portrayed the assembly-line tort manufacturing business in a slightly less-than-flattering light.

The abuse of the legal system by really swell citizens like Dickie Scruggs, Bill Lerach and Melvyn Weiss is well-documented. All three very prominent tort lawyers have been convicted and done hard-time for, among other things, bribery, paying kickbacks, suborning perjury and falsifying evidence. They're the ones we know about.

 

[squarejohn]

But squarejohn might be a bit different, he might be concentrating on that purloined(in his opinion) six grand without looking at any other part of this problem. Maybe he can be persuaded to look at a bigger picture.

Maybe not.

I am always willing to add to my knowledge.

 

[squarejohn]

The name of the novel just came to me: King of Torts.

 

[Dragonlipz]

You're so full of shit, I can smell you all the way over here.

Well at least your nose is intact since it's obvious your brain doesn't work........

 

[Katyusha]

My beef is about trial lawyers in general, and the crooked judges who play along with them. Sure, they can tell you plausible hard luck stories in which their action made life so much better for the "victim." So what? The only life a trial lawyer is interested in bettering, is his own. And while he's doing that, he's making it harder on the rest of us.

So who then? How is justice to be served? How would you do it?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Did you really believe all that stuff, Stella? Actually, I'm a pathological liar; it's impossible for me to tell the truth. Do you believe me?

This is all entertainment. Right? Some people react like a caged bear being poked with sharp sticks. I get a lot of laughs out of this and I'll bet you and most everybody else does, too.

For what it's worth.

 

[squarejohn]

So who then? How is justice to be served? How would you do it?

I wish I had the answer. All I know, is that this serious problem exists. There's been a lot of talk about "Tort Reform" over the last few years, but the trial lawyers have the democrat party in their pocket. Not much has been done.

 

[bronzeage]

I wish I had the answer. All I know, is that this serious problem exists. There's been a lot of talk about "Tort Reform" over the last few years, but the trial lawyers have the democrat party in their pocket. Not much has been done.

If all you know is "a serious problem exists", I don't see any evidence to the contrary.

"Tort Reform" is one of those vague buzz words. No one knows what it means, so it can mean anything, as needed.

It's a word used to argue healthcare costs are high because of "cover your ass " tests and malpractice insurance premiums. When one looks in states which limit punitive damages for malpractice (one form of tort reform), healthcare costs are just as high as other places.

Class action suits (like the Mesothelioma cases) is another form of tort reform. This favors the plaintiff and greatly reduces their expenses. They don't have to answer thousands of charges. It's all rolled into one package.

As for trial lawyers having the Democratic Party in their pockets, it was Republican Senators who want to cap BP's liability for damages from the Gulf oil spill. Whose pocket are they in?

 

[squarejohn]

If all you know is "a serious problem exists", I don't see any evidence to the contrary.

"Tort Reform" is one of those vague buzz words. No one knows what it means, so it can mean anything, as needed.

It's a word used to argue healthcare costs are high because of "cover your ass " tests and malpractice insurance premiums. When one looks in states which limit punitive damages for malpractice (one form of tort reform), healthcare costs are just as high as other places.

Class action suits (like the Mesothelioma cases) is another form of tort reform. This favors the plaintiff and greatly reduces their expenses. They don't have to answer thousands of charges. It's all rolled into one package.

As for trial lawyers having the Democratic Party in their pockets, it was Republican Senators who want to cap BP's liability for damages from the Gulf oil spill. Whose pocket are they in?

Whose pocket are they in? The correct answer is simple. They are in the pocket of whomever offers the most money. Everybody knows that.

I think the root of the problem of trial lawyers goes back to the 1970's, when the American Bar Association declared that it was no longer unethical for lawyers to advertise their services (beyond simply hanging out their shingle). Even further back in history, to Shakespeare (I think), "First, let's kill all the lawyers." Going back even more, Plato's philosophy advocates that anyone who uses the law for financial gain should be, "put to death."

Apparently there is something inherent in the practice of law that generates such sentiment.

 

[bronzeage]

Whose pocket are they in? The correct answer is simple. They are in the pocket of whomever offers the most money. Everybody knows that.

I think the root of the problem of trial lawyers goes back to the 1970's, when the American Bar Association declared that it was no longer unethical for lawyers to advertise their services (beyond simply hanging out their shingle). Even further back in history, to Shakespeare (I think), "First, let's kill all the lawyers." Going back even more, Plato's philosophy advocates that anyone who uses the law for financial gain should be, "put to death."

Apparently there is something inherent in the practice of law that generates such sentiment.

I come from a profession which shares as much esteem from the public as lawyers. I learned that public perception and reality are very far apart. Lawyers make an easy target and lawyers who advertise have a high profile are easier still. In this country, the courtroom is one place where all are supposed to equal. The lawyer is the person responsible for seeing this happens. If lawyers were held sacred in the same way a doctor is revered, we wouldn't have this debate. People love doctors and hate lawyers. It's human nature.

The "kill all the lawyers" line got a laughs when it was brand new. It was spoken by one of three men who were plotting to take power from the Roman people and create a dictatorship. What they planned was illegal to the point of treason. Is it any wonder they had little use for lawyers?

 

[squarejohn]

I come from a profession which shares as much esteem from the public as lawyers. I learned that public perception and reality are very far apart. Lawyers make an easy target and lawyers who advertise have a high profile are easier still. In this country, the courtroom is one place where all are supposed to equal. The lawyer is the person responsible for seeing this happens. If lawyers were held sacred in the same way a doctor is revered, we wouldn't have this debate. People love doctors and hate lawyers. It's human nature.

The "kill all the lawyers" line got a laughs when it was brand new. It was spoken by one of three men who were plotting to take power from the Roman people and create a dictatorship. What they planned was illegal to the point of treason. Is it any wonder they had little use for lawyers?

Maybe all that needs doing is for the Bar Association to declare that it is unethical for lawyers to advertise.

 

[bronzeage]

Maybe all that needs doing is for the Bar Association to declare that it is unethical for lawyers to advertise.

Other than relieving you of the burden of listening to the commercials, what would this accomplish? Are lawyers a danger to public health, in the same way as tobacco?

It is in the interest of corporations to restrict knowledge of damages. There is a statute of limitation on damage claims. The longer one waits, the better for the plaintiff.

Is this just an anti-lawyer action, or is there a real benefit to keeping people ignorant of their legal rights?

 

[amicus]

So who then? How is justice to be served? How would you do it?

~~~

You pose some interesting and, might I add, universal questions concerning justice.

Every society I have ever read about, exploited the natural resources of their habitat. Some moved on, some ravaged next door societies until they were bled dry. Even the British denuded the forests of the Colonies to satisfy their need for timber.

If there were such a thing as a benevolent dictator or monarch, even a benevolent mobocracy or an Orwellian utopian society of equals; perhaps wise men would make rules and administer justice.

In America, there is another dimension applicable; that of seemingly endless resources. Sewage and waste was dumped into waterways with little thought to downstream landowners; forests were stripped away until erosion began to affect roadways and productive lands. The widespread use of coal brought with it many intrusions on individuals, communities and property owners.

I am not fond of the 'two party' system as it now appears to be a continuation of the ages old class warfare between the have's and the have not's.

It is necessary to state, I think, that a percent or two of all humans born, turn out to be scoundrels and scallywags, and that a much larger percentage of all humans will fail to honor the property and the rights of others.

Which is why, in all societies; to interpret, apply and enforce the laws of that society, the commodity provided by legal experts, lawyers, becomes as essential as bankers and stock market traders.

In my vision of an 'ideal' society, each individual would be treated equally under the law; every property owner would be treated the same, government would own no property and no rights to the resources, all rights would rest with the property owners and the individuals.

Even in that society, humans being what they are, there would be dishonesty, fraud, theft, robberies and some enterprises cutting safety corners to beat the competition even if it meant endangering others.

It is a logical impossibility for a strong centralized government to run, regulate, control and manage every aspect of the life of every individual, thus, one should turn to some basic concepts of behavior to create the best system of government to administer the needs of the people.

When one reads through the Federalist Papers, just to name one source out of thousands in history, one will find that the questions you posed are the ones asked by generations of men before you. How to create and maintain a 'just' society wherein the rights of each individual are protected.

My understanding suggests that a Republican form of limited government, with a set of constitutional rights and limitations protecting individual rights and a separate judicial system that rules and adjudicates with those basic rights as a foundation, is the nearest thing to a Just society ever reached.

Amicus...

 

[squarejohn]

Other than relieving you of the burden of listening to the commercials, what would this accomplish? Are lawyers a danger to public health, in the same way as tobacco?

What would this accomplish? For one thing, it would force lawyers to actually chase ambulances instead of receiving phone calls from victims seeking to make a claim. The commercials I've seen, seem designed to make viewers think they'll hit the jackpot if they sign up with the law firm sponsoring the commercial. The greed in human nature will drive claimants to the law firm's door. Lawyers will cherry-pick the ones with the best sounding claims, the ones with a case most likely to be won, which is not the same as picking the case most deserving of justice.

It still has not been proven that tobacco is a danger to public health; after all, it is approved and regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Yet the Surgeon General insists that tobacco is harmful to health in many ways. Would the FDA approve something that was a danger to public health? Would the Surgeon General say something was harmful when it was not?

Lawyers' machinations have certainly caused medical costs to rise, making the best treatment unlikely for many patients. By law, nobody in this country can be denied medical treatment, so the short answer to your question, "Are lawyers a danger to public health, in the same way as tobacco?" is no.

It is in the interest of corporations to restrict knowledge of damages. There is a statute of limitation on damage claims. The longer one waits, the better for the plaintiff.

I won't try to answer this, because I don't have a clue in this area.

Is this just an anti-lawyer action, or is there a real benefit to keeping people ignorant of their legal rights?

I'm not against lawyers; I'm for real, blind justice. If a lawyer makes a fortune obtaining justice for his clients, good for him. if he makes a fortune by a perversion of our system of justice, he should be punished.

What mechanism exists to keep people ignorant of their legal rights? And if there is a real benefit for doing so, what is the benefit, and to whom would it accrue?

Bronze, you must have been a news reporter in a previous life. You do ask some nicely crafted questions.

 

[bronzeage]

What would this accomplish? For one thing, it would force lawyers to actually chase ambulances instead of receiving phone calls from victims seeking to make a claim. The commercials I've seen, seem designed to make viewers think they'll hit the jackpot if they sign up with the law firm sponsoring the commercial. The greed in human nature will drive claimants to the law firm's door. Lawyers will cherry-pick the ones with the best sounding claims, the ones with a case most likely to be won, which is not the same as picking the case most deserving of justice.

It still has not been proven that tobacco is a danger to public health; after all, it is approved and regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Yet the Surgeon General insists that tobacco is harmful to health in many ways. Would the FDA approve something that was a danger to public health? Would the Surgeon General say something was harmful when it was not?

Lawyers' machinations have certainly caused medical costs to rise, making the best treatment unlikely for many patients. By law, nobody in this country can be denied medical treatment, so the short answer to your question, "Are lawyers a danger to public health, in the same way as tobacco?" is no.


I won't try to answer this, because I don't have a clue in this area.



I'm not against lawyers; I'm for real, blind justice. If a lawyer makes a fortune obtaining justice for his clients, good for him. if he makes a fortune by a perversion of our system of justice, he should be punished.

What mechanism exists to keep people ignorant of their legal rights? And if there is a real benefit for doing so, what is the benefit, and to whom would it accrue?

Bronze, you must have been a news reporter in a previous life. You do ask some nicely crafted questions.

No, I worked on cars. After that, everything else is easy.

 

[trysail]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aheIjkMi34dc



Milberg Lawyers Leave Jail, Hit Links, Slopes; Reflect on Life
By Carlyn Kolker

March 20 (Bloomberg) -- The four lawyers who ran Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP, the firm that got investors $45 billion from securities lawsuits against publicly traded companies, are reacquainting themselves with life on the outside now that they’ve left prison.

“I am enjoying my freedom,” Melvyn I. Weiss, 74, said in a phone interview from his apartment in Boca Raton, Florida. “I am honing my skills at golf. I am thinking about the experience I just went through and what I should do with it.”

His former partner, William S. Lerach, 64, was freed March 8. Two others, David J. Bershad, 70, and Steven G. Schulman, 58, left prison in July. Prosecutors said the men, who industrialized the filing of securities fraud class actions, secretly paid clients to pursue such cases, bringing the firm $251 million in attorney fees from 1979 to 2005. All four pleaded guilty. Their old firm, now Milberg LLP, agreed to pay $75 million to end the case.

Milberg, based in New York, used intermediaries to pay clients who would serve as plaintiffs in shareholder lawsuits, the government said. The practice helped the firm file cases faster than rivals at a time when being first to sue meant it would likely control the case, reap a larger reward in the verdict or settlement, and get bigger fees.

Bershad was first to plead guilty in Los Angeles federal court in July 2007, agreeing to cooperate with prosecutors. He was followed by Schulman, Lerach and finally Weiss, who pleaded guilty in April 2008 to racketeering conspiracy.

“It’s no fun being in prison,” Lerach said in an interview when asked about his time behind bars. “You are away from your family, your loved ones and your dogs.”

Lists of Clients
Before the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, a law aimed squarely at Milberg Weiss, shareholder lawyers seeking to lead class actions, or group suits, needed simply to be the first to file. Law firms had lists of clients who owned shares in huge companies that were considered susceptible to litigation.

The reform act required plaintiffs with the biggest losses, usually institutional investors such as pension funds, to assume the lead plaintiff role, regardless of who filed first. Milberg Weiss and firms like it adapted by lobbying state and union pension funds to hire them as regular counsel. Even with the restrictions, Weiss’s firm collected $1.7 billion in legal fees and expenses from 1995 to 2005, according to a study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. The firm also handled 43 percent of the 755 shareholder class actions that settled.

Six Month Sentences
Bershad and Schulman were given six-month sentences when they were sentenced for the client-kickback scheme. Lerach received two years and Weiss 2 1/2 years. All four men, once feared in corporate boardrooms, have been disbarred.

Weiss said he is practicing his golf swing, doing charitable work and considering assisting the Haitian art community, all while reflecting on his prison experience.

“At my age it’s not easy,” he said of being incarcerated. “You have to get used to sleeping on a one-inch mattress on a metal frame, sharing toilets with 80 other guys. The food is not what you’re used to. The medical facilities are vastly understaffed.”

Weiss added that, in prison, “you meet a lot of people who you feel a great deal of sorrow for, because they have grown up in sad conditions and there is seemingly no way out for them. These are all things that I am thinking about.”

As one of the oldest inmates at the low-security prison in Morgantown, West Virginia, Weiss said he was given the moniker ‘Pops.’

Mel ‘Pops’ Weiss
“They would call me Pops, because some of these people never had a father,” the ex-lawyer explained.

Weiss declined to discuss any involvement with his former law firm. He was released from federal custody Feb. 5, after serving his last month and a half in home confinement.

Lerach said he plans to teach a course titled “Regulation of Free Market Capitalism -- Why We Have Failed,” at a law school he declined to name.

He is also planning to lecture at universities and work with a progressive think-tank, Lerach said in a phone interview from a ski vacation in Steamboat Springs, Colorado. His future also includes trout fishing in Alaska and exploring his roots in Bavaria, he said.

While in Prison
While in prisons in Lompoc, California, and Safford, Arizona, Lerach read books, kept a diary and stayed abreast of the financial crisis, he said.

“I tried to stay current on the events by watching financial and other news. You sometimes have to push and shove to get CNBC on rather than big truck crash programs, but that was all right,” said Lerach, who also spent time in a halfway house and home confinement.

Schulman declined to comment.
“Right now I am getting my life together,” said Bershad, when reached at his home in Montclair, New Jersey. “I am happy and doing fine.”

Of his prison time in Otisville, New York, he said, “It was a learning experience.” He declined to give details about what he is doing.

Lerach left Milberg Weiss in 2004 to help found his own securities-fraud firm in San Diego. He said he won’t be returning.

Coughlin Stoia
That firm, now called Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP, has more than 150 lawyers, partner Michael Dowd said. It is changing its name to Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd as partner Patrick Coughlin steps down from partnership status.

The Milberg firm paid the government more than two-thirds of the $75 million it owes, ahead of the five-year schedule set forth in its plea agreement, partner Matthew Gluck said in a phone interview.

“Over the past couple of years, while everybody has been laying off lawyers and cutting pay, we’ve been giving lawyers raises and extra bonuses,” Gluck said.

 

[Stella_Omega]

excellent copy and paste, 3sail. can you explain-- in your own words-- why your news item has any relevance here?

I am not saying it doesn't, I just want wonder if you're a human and not a copy-paste robot.