The Phony Lawsuit Crisis

When I was about seven or eight years old, one of my friends told me about how Rod Stewart had gotten wasted and had to go to the hospital to have his stomach pumped. "When they pumped it," he told us, "they pulled out seven ounce sperm." "Wow," we all thought. "seven ounce sperm sounds pretty serious." He went on. "Five more ounces and he could have had a baby. He could!" And we believed him.

A couple of years later, I learned the truth about the birds and the bees. And although I still have no desire to have that dreaded "twelve ounce sperm" in my stomach, I no longer have to live in fear that some dude might rape me in the mouth and get me pregnant. I couldn't believe I was so gullible.

Every time I hear politicians and lawyer-haters talk about the tort crisis, or the "litigation lotto", I wonder if they also worry about twelve ounce sperm. What country do these people think they are talking about? As a lawyer who actually tries cases, I can tell you that, in the real world, juries are quite cautious and reasonable. The truth is that the median jury award in the nation's 75 largest counties decreased from $65,000 in 1992 to $37,000 in 2001. And it is heading farther south, in spite of inflation.

You know, it isn't really true that juries are made up of 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty. Sure, some jurors are stupid, some are gullible, and some are overly generous with other people's money. But most jurors are normal people. And unless the defense attorney or one of the parties pisses them off, they really try hard to make sure that no one gets anything more than they deserve.

It's hard to pull the wool over the eyes of 12 normal people. Yet, everyone believes it when they get an email about the "Stella Awards", telling stories of outrageous plaintiffs suing for, and winning, obscene amounts of cash.

For example, take the supposed Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas. The Stella Awards hoax says she was awarded $780,000 by a jury after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The toddler was her own son.

Think about, would you give this bitch a dime? Hell no. If you are smart enough to see past this, do you think you are smarter than 11 out of 12 people? Okay, perhaps a few of you are, but you'd have to be, to have 12 people award this person anything. If you think you are that smart, consider this. As smart as you are, do you think you could talk 12 of your friends into handing out this kind of award? Probably not. If you think you can, try it. You'll embarrass yourself.

Another great story in this hoax is the tale of Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania, who got stuck in the garage of a house he had just robbed. The garage door opener was defective, and so trapped him in the garage for eight days, leaving him to survive on Pepsi and dog food. "He sued the homeowner's insurance company claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish," reads the hoax. "The jury agreed, to the tune of $500,000."

Burglary is a felony. The law does not permit someone to recover anything, ANYTHING, arising out of any misfortune which befalls them during the commission of that felony. Besides, does this make any fucking sense whatsoever? A week in a garage? He's a freaking burglar. You think he can't figure out how to pull the cord on the garage door and open it manually? Or break the lock or the door to the house? Given a whole week? Please. Plus, Pennsylvania law, I am told, does not allow negligent infliction of emotional distress in cases where there is no personal injury and no "special relationship" (burglar-homeowner does not qualify) between the parties. This guy, if he exists, cannot, would not and did not get half a million on these facts.

Then there is Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Mr. Grazinski, we are told, purchased a brand new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On his first trip home, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and walked back to make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the RV crashed. Mr. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him in the owner's manual that he couldn't do this. "The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new motor home."

Again, to whom does this story make sense? Juries do not award money and a new car. They award money. But there is no chance that a jury awarded a dime on these facts. And if one ever did, the judge would issue what is called a "judgment notwithstanding the verdict." Mr. Grazinski would go home with nothing. And if the judge did not grant a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the court of appeals would reverse. But if the court of appeals did not reverse, you would have heard about this one on the news. Every channel. You wouldn't have to wait for the super top-secret email revelation from some perpilocutionist.

There is not one lawyer out there getting rich off frivolous lawsuits. The truth, if you can handle the truth, is that lawyers who chase frivolous claims go broke doing so. In fact, lawyers sometimes go broke chasing after good claims. I turn people with good claims away every week, because I know the jury isn't going to award enough money to make it worth my while, or worth my client's while.

But some people will continue to scream about frivolous lawsuits, pushing for unnecessary laws that will make it hard for people like you to get a fair deal when someone else hurts you or screws you over. You probably won't be able to convince them of the truth. But if you want to have a little but of fun, you might try warning them about the dangers of accumulating more than eleven ounces of sperm.

Comments

[air jordans]

*i like this part of the post.I think a lot of people would be surprised how easy it is to start including fine-motor activities in playtime.

[abeysomone]

I like that and very glad.
thanks
============================================

Safeguard Motorhome Insurance

[[email protected]]

Your article about the litigation lotto was very interesting. Living in California can be quite a challenge. I have seen some of these litigants in action. One in small claims, they call her the "Queen of the Small Claims Court", and a guy and his parents who appear to be making their living off the family law courts, ie Sweetheart Scam, Pro Se Fraud. And boy do they have a bag of tricks. Legal tricks. Dealing with lawyers is alot easier than dealing with these dishonest Pro Se Litigants. They have no controls and will magically come up with doctored evidence, relatives who lie not only against other witnesses, but against other lawyers who have created legal documentation. I have seen Pro Se litigant really pull alot of crap, even when DAs are present and attorneys. Somehow they've gotten the idea, that because they are Pro Se that this is a new kind of lawyer! And that they can challenge any lawyer to a dual! Ha Ha!

[rv rental]

this rental crisis is crazy