<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css" type="text/css" media="screen"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Overlawyered</title>
	
	<link>http://overlawyered.com</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/CommentsForOverlawyered" type="application/rss+xml" /><item>
		<title>Comment on “Dr. Megaworkup” by William Nuesslein</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/dr-megaworkup/#comment-34996</link>
		<dc:creator>William Nuesslein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7873#comment-34996</guid>
		<description>In the early seventies my son was shoved by a bully and hit his head against a wall. There was some bleeding, and the school sent him off to the ER. A little clean water and a bandage was all that was required; some antibiotic perhaps. Yet several x-rays were taken. Defensive medicine in my son's case was long ago and expensive. (My son was OK!)

What drives the defensive/excessive medicine? Second guessing, especially when there is an adverse outcome, must have some effect. The lack of cost/benefit calculation. I certainly would have declined the x-rays in the case of the minor injury of my son. There was nothing to justify their cost.  The humane tendency to show that one is an excellent doctor.  

Since claims of malpractice are mostly wrong, the plaintiff bar does not help matters. "Perhaps that extra test saved a life" is the claim, but the lawyer who makes the claim can base it only on conjecture, as there is almost never a suit when treatment is effective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the early seventies my son was shoved by a bully and hit his head against a wall. There was some bleeding, and the school sent him off to the ER. A little clean water and a bandage was all that was required; some antibiotic perhaps. Yet several x-rays were taken. Defensive medicine in my son&#8217;s case was long ago and expensive. (My son was OK!)</p>
<p>What drives the defensive/excessive medicine? Second guessing, especially when there is an adverse outcome, must have some effect. The lack of cost/benefit calculation. I certainly would have declined the x-rays in the case of the minor injury of my son. There was nothing to justify their cost.  The humane tendency to show that one is an excellent doctor.  </p>
<p>Since claims of malpractice are mostly wrong, the plaintiff bar does not help matters. &#8220;Perhaps that extra test saved a life&#8221; is the claim, but the lawyer who makes the claim can base it only on conjecture, as there is almost never a suit when treatment is effective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on “Dr. Megaworkup” by Jim Collins</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/dr-megaworkup/#comment-34995</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Collins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7873#comment-34995</guid>
		<description>Thanks,that's kind of what I thought Whitecoat.  What I thought ironic was that they told me not to worry about the costs of the test, they were covered by my insurance.  I understand their concerns, even though I think it is a load of BS.  I used to have to do something similiar when I worked on small planes.  It didn't matter if I were changing the oil or replacing the engine, I did a complete inspection everytime I touched a plane.  If I just changed the oil and two days later the wing fell off I was sure that I would be talking to a lawyer soon.  If my license number was in that log book I was in the lawsuit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks,that&#8217;s kind of what I thought Whitecoat.  What I thought ironic was that they told me not to worry about the costs of the test, they were covered by my insurance.  I understand their concerns, even though I think it is a load of BS.  I used to have to do something similiar when I worked on small planes.  It didn&#8217;t matter if I were changing the oil or replacing the engine, I did a complete inspection everytime I touched a plane.  If I just changed the oil and two days later the wing fell off I was sure that I would be talking to a lawyer soon.  If my license number was in that log book I was in the lawsuit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” by Roy B</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/suit-forces-eharmony-to-offer-gay-dating-service/#comment-34994</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:20:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7894#comment-34994</guid>
		<description>Further on PSaunders comment, did the same ruling require that gay and lesbian dating services set up hetero services?  If not, is this ruling not discriminatory in and of itself?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Further on PSaunders comment, did the same ruling require that gay and lesbian dating services set up hetero services?  If not, is this ruling not discriminatory in and of itself?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Debra Saunders on eHarmony suit by “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service”</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2007/06/debra-saunders-on-eharmony-suit/#comment-34987</link>
		<dc:creator>“Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service”</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:28:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4985#comment-34987</guid>
		<description>[...] (Reuters, Nov. 19, FoxNews.com)(via Friedersdorf, see also Mataconis). Earlier coverage: Jun. 1 and Jun. 8, 2007; Mar. 26, 2006 (married man wants [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (Reuters, Nov. 19, FoxNews.com)(via Friedersdorf, see also Mataconis). Earlier coverage: Jun. 1 and Jun. 8, 2007; Mar. 26, 2006 (married man wants [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Piracy and international human rights, cont’d by VMS</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/piracy-and-international-human-rights-contd/#comment-34986</link>
		<dc:creator>VMS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7891#comment-34986</guid>
		<description>Well, I guess that the British, historically known for their staunch stance agaisnt piracy, and have in yesteryear fired upon pirate ships and hanged the survivors on the spot, will have to call in the Indian navy who seems to be the only country now willing to use military force to curb piracy on the high seas.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-somalia_20nov20,0,4913179.story

In response to (1), merchant vessels could legally arm themselves, but they probably would not want to. The reason shipping and hence the cost of imported goods is so cheap is that a crew of 15-20 can run a modern cargo ship transporting millions of dollars of merchandise. These ships, even if armed, would stand no chance against an attack by pirates.

If the various navys and other military were allowed to go after these pirates in earnest, the problem would be solved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I guess that the British, historically known for their staunch stance agaisnt piracy, and have in yesteryear fired upon pirate ships and hanged the survivors on the spot, will have to call in the Indian navy who seems to be the only country now willing to use military force to curb piracy on the high seas.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-somalia_20nov20,0,4913179.story" rel="nofollow">http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-somalia_20nov20,0,4913179.story</a></p>
<p>In response to (1), merchant vessels could legally arm themselves, but they probably would not want to. The reason shipping and hence the cost of imported goods is so cheap is that a crew of 15-20 can run a modern cargo ship transporting millions of dollars of merchandise. These ships, even if armed, would stand no chance against an attack by pirates.</p>
<p>If the various navys and other military were allowed to go after these pirates in earnest, the problem would be solved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” by VMS</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/suit-forces-eharmony-to-offer-gay-dating-service/#comment-34984</link>
		<dc:creator>VMS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:56:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7894#comment-34984</guid>
		<description>WTF!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WTF!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Piracy and international human rights, cont’d by James</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/piracy-and-international-human-rights-contd/#comment-34970</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7891#comment-34970</guid>
		<description>What are the legalities of allowing merchant vessels to arm themselves in order to repel pirates?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What are the legalities of allowing merchant vessels to arm themselves in order to repel pirates?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” by P Saunders</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2008/11/suit-forces-eharmony-to-offer-gay-dating-service/#comment-34967</link>
		<dc:creator>P Saunders</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:09:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=7894#comment-34967</guid>
		<description>This is sorta like forcing a vegan restaurant to serve you a steak because, well, its illegal to discriminate against someone just because they are meat eaters and happen to insist on frequenting your restaurant even though you only serve vegan dishes. Rather than tie up the judicial system, the plaintiff would have been better served by using a dating service that specialises in serving the gay community.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is sorta like forcing a vegan restaurant to serve you a steak because, well, its illegal to discriminate against someone just because they are meat eaters and happen to insist on frequenting your restaurant even though you only serve vegan dishes. Rather than tie up the judicial system, the plaintiff would have been better served by using a dating service that specialises in serving the gay community.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on eHarmony’s 29 Dimensions of… Litigation by “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service”</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2007/06/eharmonys-29-dimensions-of-litigation/#comment-34963</link>
		<dc:creator>“Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service”</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:24:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/index.php/2007/06/eharmonys-29-dimensions-of-litigation/#comment-34963</guid>
		<description>[...] said on Wednesday.” (Reuters, Nov. 19, FoxNews.com)(via Friedersdorf). Earlier coverage: Jun. 1 and Jun. 8, 2007; Mar. 26, 2006 (married man wants [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] said on Wednesday.&#8221; (Reuters, Nov. 19, FoxNews.com)(via Friedersdorf). Earlier coverage: Jun. 1 and Jun. 8, 2007; Mar. 26, 2006 (married man wants [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on eHarmony’s 29 Dimensions of… Litigation by Michelle Malkin » eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2007/06/eharmonys-29-dimensions-of-litigation/#comment-34960</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle Malkin » eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/index.php/2007/06/eharmonys-29-dimensions-of-litigation/#comment-34960</guid>
		<description>[...] sued by a lesbian  looking to force the company to match her up with another woman and by a married man who sought to force the company to hook him up in an adulterous [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] sued by a lesbian  looking to force the company to match her up with another woman and by a married man who sought to force the company to hook him up in an adulterous [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss><!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.703 seconds -->
