LAWYERLY LUNACY - NY Post Editorial - TORT Reform

NY Post ^ | 2/16/03 | NY Post Editorial

[NYC Republican]

February 16, 2003 -- Eenie, meenie, minie, moe, catch a lawyer by the toe. If he hollers - keep squeezing. Tighter. Well, no, that's not the way the rhyme goes. But it should.

In what may take outrageous judicial sufferance to the height of ethnic oversensitivity, a Kansas City-based federal court judge will allow a discrimination lawsuit against Southwest Airlines to go forward.

[NYC Republican]

This is infuriating! The NY Post editorial is spot on with its view. I'm surprised I haven't heard about this elsewhere... must have just missed it.

[friendly]

My recommendations for this problem and for the unregulated lawyer plague that damages all of our lives in so many ways? The world would be a better place with:

1) Loser Pays. This is the law in the civilized democratic world. Waivers are given to the poor, as is the case with most reform proposals in the US to end the current astonishingly corrupt system.

2) Massive tort reform on a unprecedented level

3) Widespread empowerment of paralegals for independent practice

4) An end to punitive damages.

5) An end to bogus class action suits.

6) Outlawing contingency fees (This is considered grossly unethical and is completely illegal in almost all other democracies).

7) Lawyers forbidden from running from office. They are agents of the judiciary. Practicing attorneys violate The Separation of Powers when they enrich their lawyer industry at public suffering. The Constitution mandates The Separation of Powers between the 3 branches of government. Lawyers are members of the Judiciary and should therefore not be eligible for the Presidency (the Executive branch) or the Congress (the Legislative branch). I believe strongly as a matter of ethics, that a lawyer like Hillary, Bill, or John Edwards must give up membership in the bar, if only temporarily, when serving in the Senate or seeking (God forbid) the Presidency. These vermin can always reapply to the bar after leaving office. It is an important ethical point. Actually someone like Hillary or Bill would not be re-admitted to the bar. Bill Clinton was in fact disbarred due to his illegal activities.

8) Most important: a total disempowerment of the bar associations. Lawyer discipline by true consumer control agencies. Regulated by an open governmental process, with all complaints against lawyers open for public inspection. Like any other industry. Government has, even for the most libertarian of tastes, basic functions to protect the nation. And the lawyer industry is a grave threat to our freedoms and democracy, make no mistake.

[HHFi]

They could switch to "One Potato, Two Potato," but then they'd get sued by the Irish.

[JimVT]

Beautiful. Where do I sign?

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

An example of an out of control judiciary.

[NYC Republican]

Fantastic Post. I think that all of your suggestions are great, though there is a bit of overlap there. I believe that implementing item #1 would eliminate nearly all of the frivolous lawsuits altogether. Again, awesome post.

[finnman69]

I actually saw an ad on the NYC subway today that was un believable. It was for a personal injury law firm but what made it different was the political nature of it. It specifically mentioned conservatives and the House resolution passed last year on tort reform limiting personal injury cases to $250,000.

It said to contact your legislators and tell them not to support this. Of course the ad also showed multi million dollar paydouts and claimed "we fight against child brain injuries". Discusting lecherous lawyers. I wish I could remember the website of the firm.

[kwyjibo]

Do juries currently have the right to force plaintiffs to pay any or all of a defendant's legal fees in frivolous cases like this one? Not that it will ever actually occur, since plaintiffs use all of their peremptory challenges on jurors with the highest IQs, but that's the only weapon we've got.

[det dweller too]

They could switch to "One Potato, Two Potato," but then they'd get sued by the Irish.

ROTFLMAO. Thanks for the chuckle.

[mjustice]

The law firm you are referring to is Fitzgerald & Fitzgerald, P.C. I ride the subway at least five days a week and I have seen the ads too. Tasteless and disgusting. While I have respect for the practice of law, these scumbags prey on those most likely to ride the subway - poor and lower middle class workers.

The address of the site is lawfitz.com

MJ

[NYC Republican]

Like yourself, I ride the subway daily, and find the ad appaling. I'll send these scumbags a few e-mails and phone calls, expressing my opinions.

Thanks for the web address.

[kwyjibo]

FYI- This nugget came from Michelle Malkin's column dated 2/14/03 on Townhall.com:

U.S. District Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, appointed by President Bush I...

I believe "41" has officially requested a "do-over" on that appointment.

And then some wire service report said that Judge Vratil dismissed the women's claims of physical and emotional distress yet allowed the trial to continue on the basis that the rhyme could reasonably be viewed as racist and offensive. (???)

[sarasmom]

I guess yours is the more "compassionate" way.

Personnally,I think if we "first, kill all the lawyers..."

Law and ethics have been separated in this society.It is now considered "ethical behavior", even the duty of lawyers to facilitate the offending party in avoiding the consequences of their illegal actions.

Any here who have avoided jury duty are complicit in the degradation of the rule of law.

Tort reform is only the first step in reclaiming our society from insanity.

[NYC Republican]

I LOVE your Carter comment. Awesome.

[sarasmom]

Thank you.
Please do not ping me to any Carter threads, as I seem to find them by magic, and I am now racing the clock with my blood pressure against his evilly induced longevity, in order to fufill a vow I made to his murdered victims,in the late 1970s.

[finnman69]

I knew it was something like kurtzlaw or fritz.

Those are the RAT lawyers. They really give lawyers a bad name.

[kwyjibo]

Your comment: An example of an out of control judiciary.

That was my first impression, too. But, after reading the actual judgment available on the Kansas US District Court webpage, I believe the judge acted correctly under the law in this instance. She granted summary judgment to Southwest in two of the claims, but was forced to allow the discrimination complaint to proceed based on the precedent that evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the party against summary judgment.

You can read Judge Vratil's decision here: http://www.ksd.uscourts.gov/ors/opinions/012385-93.pdf

The real problem is out-of-control trial lawyers. At one time President Bush promised to push tort reform. I'm still waiting, Mr. President.

[July 4th]

What an un-PC firm mascot.

[BluH2o]

Saw a billboard this past week next to a major interstate in a midwest urban area ... with a guy in a neck brace, sitting in a wheel chair ... with the caption "Injured in a car accident?" Call XYZ law firm @ 1-800 etc., we have been successful in recovering (outrageous number) of millions for our clients.
We need tort reform in this country Big-Time ... now!

[an amused spectator]

But U.S. District Court Judge Kathryn Vatil says she thinks the sisters - who claim they felt "alienated" when some passengers allegedly laughed at the rhyme - have a case.

"The court agrees with plaintiffs that because of its history, the phrase 'eenie, meenie, minie, moe' could reasonably be viewed as objectively racist and offensive," she wrote.

These same "judges" will just sniff at the history of the Second Amendment. Almost time for Proposition 223 to move forward...