I know it is not a tort case, but this post from Law and Disorder reports on what can happen before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals when you don’t have your damages proof in proper order.
An excerpt
"I have never seen such an incompetent presentation of a damages case," [Judge Richard A.] Posner said. "It’s not only incompetent, it’s grotesque. You’ve got damages jumping around from $11 million to $130 million to $122 million to $33 million. In fact, the damages are probably zero."
John Stossel is a Fox News reporter ( I use the word "reporter" lightly, especially in conjunction with Fox News) who dislikes lawsuits and the lawyers who file them.
Except when he finds it necessary to file one. Like he did when he was bitch-slapped by a wrestler.
Eric Turkewitz does his usual excellent job covering the story about this hypocrite. Read it here.
"Death by Medicine" is a report by Gary Null, PhD; Carolyn Dean MD, ND; Martin Feldman, MD; Debora Rasio, MD; and Dorothy Smith, PhD.
The report reveals that "that the total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per year. It is now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the US. (By contrast, the number of deaths attributable to heart disease in 2001 was 699,697, while the number of deaths attributable to cancer was 553,251."
The report explains that
Regular readers know that I am a Max Kennerly fan. He does it again with post titled "The Truth Self of The Plaintiff’s Trial Lawyer."
An excerpt:
Trial lawyers walk into court with plans, backup plans, and with training and experience in various techniques and methods. Trial, though, has a way of knocking askew the best laid schemes of mice and men; it’s less a choreographed ballet and more a rough mix of strategic adaptation, technical mastery, wit, and endurance.
Many plaintiff’s lawyers limit themselves to reading only legal articles written by lawyers who also represent plaintiffs.
Big mistake.
There are lots of good resources out there written by members of the defense bar. This article, by Richards H. Ford, is a fine example. Titled "Negligent Security: When is Crime Your Problem," Ford provides an overview of the circumstances under which negligent security cases can arise and the applicable law. To be sure, the law of each state is a little different. But, if you are thinking about accepting representation in on of these cases, you will get off to a good start by reading this article. At an absolute minimum you will get a solid handle on how your opponent will undertake to defend the case.
My friend Kyle Hendrick from Chattanooga send in a nice comment this morning, referencing a post of over 4 years ago that, quite frankly, had completely slipped my mind. I looked it up – and here it is:
The President’s daughter Jenna has written a book that she "very, very modestly" hopes will have the influence of Anne Frank’s The Diary of Anne Frank.
Like Jenna, I too find myself tightly bound by humility. Her willingness to reveal her hopes despite her extreme modesty compel me to reveal one of my own hopes: that this blog will have the influence of the Declaration of Independence.
The American Medical Association has finally recognized the important role that lawyers play in advancing the interests of their clients in the justice system. Indeed, it has even created a "Litigation Center" to "ensure physicians’ rights are upheld in the most important challenges facing today’s working physician."
Rumor has it that the AMA is considering whether their patients should have the same access to legal representation and the civil justice system. A report on this issue is due December 25, 2067.
The Tennessee General Assemby has made it more difficult to bring worker’s compensation cases when the injured employee tests positive for the presence of alcohol or other drugs.
Under current T.C.A. Sec. 50-6-110 if an injured employee has a positive (within defined limits) blood test it is presumed that the use of alcohol or other drug was the cause of the injury. However, that presumption can be rebutted by other evidence.
Public Chapter 203 raises the burden of proof on the employee in such cases from "preponderance of the evidence" to "clear and convincing."
The Asbestos Law Journal has this great post on a huge asbestos verdict in Mississippi a short time ago. The blog notes that "part of why the jury did so may be because of a handwritten note that indicates one of the defendants engaged in a cost-benefit analysis that concluded it was OK to give people cancer as long as the profit exceeded the cost of the ensuing lawsuits."
Here is the a PDF of the hand-written document at issue. The operative language is about one-third of the way down the page.
The Tennessee Bar Journal has published an article I wrote concerning the permissible scope of expert testimony. The article discusses the decision of the Tennessee Court of Appeals in Holder v. Westgate Resorts Ltd.. Here is the majority opinion and here is the concurring / dissenting opinion of Judge Susano.
This is an excerpt of the article, titled "That’s (Not) a Fact, Jack:"
The majority opinion in Holder has grave implications for the trial of cases involving experts. It has the potential for injustice to plaintiffs and defendants. Fortunately, the Tennessee Supreme Court accepted review of the case. In the view of this writer, the court should send a clear message that the proffered testimony in this case was properly excluded and that otherwise inadmissible facts, data and opinions should not normally find their way to the fact finder merely because an expert witness wants to testify about them.
