Bork v. Bork

NY Times ^ | June 14, 2007 | Editorial

[neverdem]

There are many versions of the cliché that “a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged,” and Robert Bork has just given rise to another. A tort plaintiff, it turns out, is a critic of tort lawsuits who has slipped and fallen at the Yale Club.

Mr. Bork, of course, is the former federal appeals court judge who was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1987 but not confirmed by the Senate. He has long been famous for his lack of sympathy for people who go to court with claims of race or sex discrimination, or other injustices. He has gotten particularly exercised about accident victims driving up the cost of business by filing lawsuits. In an op-ed article, he once complained that “juries dispense lottery-like windfalls,” and compared the civil justice system to “Barbary pirates.”

That was before Mr. Bork spoke at the Yale Club last year, and fell on his way to the dais, injuring his leg and bumping his head. Mr. Bork is not merely suing the club for failing to provide a set of stairs and a handrail between the floor and the dais. He has filed a suit that is so aggressive about the law that, if he had not filed it himself, we suspect he might regard it as, well, piratical.

Mr. Bork puts the actual damages for his apparently non-life-threatening injuries (after his fall, he was reportedly able to go on and deliver his speech) at “in excess of $1,000,000.” He is also claiming punitive damages. And he is demanding that the Yale Club pay his attorney’s fees.

We can imagine what Mr. Bork the legal scholar would ask if he had a chance to question Mr. Bork the plaintiff. If it was “reasonably foreseeable” that without stairs and a handrail...

[neverdem]

Since Robert Bork has no use for the Second Amendment, I have to laugh at the Times exposing his hypocrisy.

[highball]

Wow. Didn’t see that one coming.

I can’t stand hypocrites. I’d rather deal with an honest leftist than someone who has double standards.

[California Patriot]

I wouldn’t trust the NY Times.

However, IF the facts are as claimed in the editorial, it’s definitely hypocrisy on the part of Judge Bork.
And hypocrisy when it comes to the law is the last thing we need.

[donna]

One time I skipped signing up for unemployment because I was a real conservative.

I’ll never be that stupid again.

[keat]

String up the b*stard. Glad he wasn’t confirmed.

[InvisibleChurch]

I'm wondering if the NYTimes wasn't talking about Bjork?

[Chi-townChief]

Now there’s an oxymoron if ever I heard one.

[tpaine]

Bork as bumpkin bump.

[kenth]

Going to do a little Borking of his own...

[middie]

I, and members of my firm, as well as most trial lawyers with whom I associate, are all proud to be a part of the 450 year common law tradition of protecting the rights of individuals from the harm of others and the impression or oppressions of government. We, and are ancestors in the law, are the last line between the citizen and agencies of government who hope to gain its own way even if the rights, privileges and immunities of person due constitutional protection are breached.

Similarly, none of us respect those few of our misguided brethren who have abused the law in their attemps to transform it from a helping profession into a craven business that places the generation of revenue above the welfare of those whom we have sworn our oaths to represent before the courts.

Like us, don't like us, no matter; many people share that disdain until they need one of us to protect their rights. Don't forget, a few years ago FR was in a world of copyright hurt and it was a fine lawyer in LA who protected this forum.

[neverdem]

I wouldn’t trust the NY Times.

Former Judge Sues Yale Club After Tumble

That's a conservative source. When facts are so easy to verify now, why would you think the NY Times Editorial Board would make things up? This is not some lame reporter. It's the stories that they ignore that's their usual trick as a general rule.

[Choose Ye This Day]

Bork! Bork! Bork!

[gusopol3]

right. Close down all the maternity wards.. Somebody could get hurt there.

[SierraWasp]

"We, and are(?) ancestors in the law,"

Hello again, middie... look what a funny thing I found hiding in your briefs!!! (snark!)

[middie]

My English text approves of that tense with multiple modifiers....

[SierraWasp]

Stop! You’re even putting your pathetic predecessors AND your lessor successors in pain and suffering!!! Ha Ha Ha!!!

[Dinsdale]

Un I vas climen de sprecherstanden und me slippen. Bork, bork, bork downen un de sitzen.

Sue. Sue. Sue.

[tpaine]

Don't forget, a few years ago FR was in a world of copyright hurt and it was a fine lawyer in LA who protected this forum.

You need rest.

[Alberta's Child]

Fine. But remember that Bork basically exposed himself as a complete fraud with his op-ed articles in support of the Justice Department lawsuit against Microsoft.

[middie]

Hey, don't misunderstand me. I have a personal and professional dislike of Robert Bork. His distortion of antitrust theory and the protection of competitive practices is anathema to me. On the bench as well as in his writings and speeches he is merely a shill for the massive machinery of anticonsumer piracy and the Chamber of Commerce; an institution not known for its protection of the American consumer. Yet, he's articulate, persuasive and, similar to any other type of tyrant, political, economic or judicial, bathes in a pool of self-justification through mistatements and universalization of his conclusions from anecdotal examples.

There are very few people with whom I disagree intellectually that I wouldn't share a beer and ballgame with; fortunately for me, I don't have to exercise that prerogative with Judge Bork because it's certain to not arise.