Posts Tagged ‘chasing clients’

“Anatomy of a Mass Tort”

Experienced defense counsel Beck and Herrmann have a must-read post summarizing the lifecycle of a mass tort., touching on many of the themes Walter and I have covered in the past: the at-best parasitic irrelevance of the plaintiffs’ bar to the safety of the product (at worst, trial lawyers are counterproductive); the feeding frenzy of peripheral litigation and ambulance-chasing to sign up clients; the irrelevancies of game-show style trials to the ultimate issues of the case, much less public safety.

Beck and Herrmann’s model could certainly use some expansion; if anything, they understate the absurdity of the status quo. There’s no mention of the peripheral “consumer-fraud” class actions on behalf of the customers who have suffered no injury; the expense and harassment of discovery; the jockeying of the plaintiffs’ bar to plant misleading stories in the press to taint the jury; the efforts to use taxpayer resources of various trial-lawyer-friendly state attorney generals to harass the defendant; the lobbying by the plaintiffs’ bar to force the defendant to settle before plaintiffs have to test their complaints’ theories in the judicial system; the mass fraud by trial lawyers that almost invariably accompanies the mass tort.

US government: no more hiring contingent fee lawyers

An executive order signed today bars United States government agencies from hiring contingent-fee attorneys or expert witnesses to litigate on behalf of the government. The Institute for Legal Reform applauded the decision, and called for state governments to follow suit. A California court recently struck down such arrangements in that state as an inherently unethical conflict of interest. See County of Santa Clara v. Atlantic Richfield Company, No. 1-00-CV-788657, slip op. at 2 (Cal. Super. Ct. Apr. 4, 2007) (via the increasingly indispensable Beck and Herrmann). (Cross-posted at Point of Law.)

Tasteless lawyer-ad Hall of Fame

“Life’s short. Get a divorce,” proclaims the Chicago billboard of the law firm of Fetman, Garland & Associates. Flanking the message: big pictures of a buxom temptress in black lace bra and, on the other side, a half-clad muscleman. Reaction has been strong:

“It’s grotesque,” said John Ducanto, past president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. “It’s totally undignified and offensive.”

“It trivializes divorce and I think it’s absolutely disgusting,” Rick Tivers, a clinical social worker at the Center for Divorce Recovery in Chicago, told ABC News. …

One of the genuine lions of the American divorce courts — New York’s Raoul Felder — said the ad was a new low for the profession.

“This has to be the Academy Award of bad taste,” Felder told ABC News. …

[The billboard] peers down into an area of Rush Street known as the “Viagra Triangle” for its three, trendy singles bars in an affluent section of Chicago known as the “Gold Coast.”

(Chris Francescani, ABCNews.com, May 7). Update May 10: billboard pulled down after alderman reports it to building inspector as lacking a permit.

Mom: I never authorized lawyer to sue school over football injury

Curious doings in Camden, N.J.:

Nita Lawrence, whose son Shykem was paralyzed in a scrimmage football game between Woodrow Wilson and Eastern Regional high schools on Aug. 25, said Monday she never gave a Michigan lawyer authorization to file paperwork naming both high schools in a potential $10 million lawsuit.

In fact, Lawrence said she fired [Ronald R.] Gilbert in early March after he tried to receive advance payment from Bollinger Insurance, the company that provides coverage for student athletes in the Camden School District.

“We didn’t say we were suing nobody,” Lawrence said. “All we wanted was the insurance company to pay for my son’s medical bills. That’s all we wanted.

“We don’t want no $10 million. We’re living fine. Whatever the insurance company doesn’t pay, Medicaid pays. We don’t need a lawsuit. Now, we’ve got all these people against us and it’s not fair because it’s not true.”

A $10 million notice of claim dated Mar. 20 names 18 people, including football coaches, principals and superintendents, as possible defendants. (Chuck Gormley, “Mom: No suit authorized over son’s injury”, Camden Courier-Post, May 1; “Michigan lawyer confirms he’s off Lawrence case”, May 2).

Further information on Fenton, Michigan attorney Ronald R. Gilbert can be found here. Gilbert appears to be the guiding spirit behind two seemingly philanthropic outfits, the Foundation for Spinal Cord Injury Prevention, Care & Cure and the Foundation for Aquatic Injury Prevention. Visitors to the two groups’ websites rather quickly run into discussions of liability and legal options which would seem helpful, no doubt unintentionally, to attorney Gilbert’s client intake efforts.

April 27 roundup

“Where there’s blame, there’s a claim”

Obituaries detail the life and fast times of Mark Langford, the British entrepreneur who founded The Accident Group and rode it to a fortune advertising for “no-win, no-fee” injury claimants, becoming closely identified with the U.K.’s emergent U.S.-style “compensation culture”, before the group collapsed in ignominy four years ago. When his company found itself unable to pay its bills, Langford famously sacked 2,500 employees via text message; “While thousands were left without a penny following TAG’s collapse, Langford and his wife, a fellow director of the firm, were not. As staff began ransacking the company’s offices in Manchester, the couple headed for the Spanish sun.” (“Mark Langford”, The Telegraph, Apr. 11; David Brown & Jon Clarke, “Fugitive boss who sacked his staff by text is killed in Costa car crash”, Times Online, Apr. 11).

Perhaps the most successful instigator of injury litigation in his nation’s history, Langford appeared not to have fully internalized in his own conduct the tort system’s norms about avoidance of needlessly unsafe conduct:

He was at the wheel of his red Ferrari 355 F1 Spider three years ago [i.e., circa 2000] when he hit a 73-year-old war veteran who was crossing the road. The impact that killed Bill Thornley hurled him 15ft into the air and ripped his clothes off, a jury was told at Manchester crown court. However, they cleared Langford of causing death by dangerous driving and convicted him of the lesser offence of careless driving. He was fined £1,000 but retained his driving licence.

Langford, who criticised the dead man in court for trying to cross a busy, wet road in twilight, insisted he was abiding by the 40mph limit, contradicting witnesses who claimed he was doing 55mph. Some jury members, unaware that he had a conviction for drink-driving, covered their faces with their hands on learning he had served a 22-month ban and recovered his licence only six months before the fatal crash.

(“Profile: Mark Langford”, Times Online, Jun. 1, 2003). Our earlier coverage appeared Aug. 5, 2003.