Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Scott Pruitt resignation
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dave70968" data-source="post: 3131681" data-attributes="member: 13624"><p>I understand what you mean. What you may not know is how much litigation <em>doesn't</em> see a courtroom. I took my cue from my dad (also an attorney), who always maintained that a case that goes to trial is often a sign of two lawyers who didn't do their jobs. I know a lot of lawyers who agree; many, like me, are <em>proud</em> of keeping a case out of court. The trouble is, we can't force a case to settle; that decision is always in the hands of the client (and, in fact, we have an ethical canon about that, too). Frequently, the sticking point isn't the assignment of guilt or liability, but rather the amount--the tortfeasor admits liability, but the parties can't agree on a settlement. And, for the ones that seem outrageous, there's often a whole lot more to the story that doesn't really get publicized, no doubt because it would make the headline a lot less sensational. The McDonald's hot coffee case is a prime example of this (I'd be happy to explain elsewhere, but I've already dragged this thread pretty well off-topic, and I'd rather not take it further off the rails). As to those who don't follow the ethics rules, well, again, it's the notable ones who get the press. Just like cops, really (though lawyers don't generally have the power to take a life, nor do we get the benefit of the doubt that law enforcement does): the sensational stories get the headlines.</p><p></p><p>I'm always happy to answer to the best of my ability any questions anybody has; the things you <em>don't</em> know (through no fault of your own) really do change the picture.</p><p></p><p>As to politicians, well, people who actively seek such power aren't representative of the profession, nor of humanity as a whole. I've heard it said that such people--politicians, CEOs, any sort of power-seeker--often exhibit some degree of sociopathy. Often, the ones at the lowest levels are the worst, and you need look no further than most HOA boards to see the proof of that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dave70968, post: 3131681, member: 13624"] I understand what you mean. What you may not know is how much litigation [I]doesn't[/I] see a courtroom. I took my cue from my dad (also an attorney), who always maintained that a case that goes to trial is often a sign of two lawyers who didn't do their jobs. I know a lot of lawyers who agree; many, like me, are [I]proud[/I] of keeping a case out of court. The trouble is, we can't force a case to settle; that decision is always in the hands of the client (and, in fact, we have an ethical canon about that, too). Frequently, the sticking point isn't the assignment of guilt or liability, but rather the amount--the tortfeasor admits liability, but the parties can't agree on a settlement. And, for the ones that seem outrageous, there's often a whole lot more to the story that doesn't really get publicized, no doubt because it would make the headline a lot less sensational. The McDonald's hot coffee case is a prime example of this (I'd be happy to explain elsewhere, but I've already dragged this thread pretty well off-topic, and I'd rather not take it further off the rails). As to those who don't follow the ethics rules, well, again, it's the notable ones who get the press. Just like cops, really (though lawyers don't generally have the power to take a life, nor do we get the benefit of the doubt that law enforcement does): the sensational stories get the headlines. I'm always happy to answer to the best of my ability any questions anybody has; the things you [I]don't[/I] know (through no fault of your own) really do change the picture. As to politicians, well, people who actively seek such power aren't representative of the profession, nor of humanity as a whole. I've heard it said that such people--politicians, CEOs, any sort of power-seeker--often exhibit some degree of sociopathy. Often, the ones at the lowest levels are the worst, and you need look no further than most HOA boards to see the proof of that. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Scott Pruitt resignation
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom