Excuse me, but it appears that Santorum's reforms, would have offered the med. profession, some protection from that greedy wife of his?
There is a little truth to that statement. However, another problem is the unrealistic expectations some clients have regarding the value of their cases in today's enviornment. On another note, I doubt you'd want damages capped if a bad doctor injured you. Truth be told, I don't believe anyone here can honestly say they'd support caps if it impacted them personally.
Excuse me, but it appears that Santorum's reforms, would have offered the med. profession, some protection from that greedy wife of his?
7th Amendment Republicans and conservative Democrats
I will give the legal eagles their due in that they try to police their own via Bar investigations and discipline.
Most of the time, yes, you have to prove the underlying case. So for example, if you go to a lawyer with a slip and fall case and your lawyer blows your statute of limitations by not properly filing your case in time, you'd still have to prove the case was viable. In other words that your case was good to begin with.
Well, that didn't help much.
But if the case has been decided and the client claims it was wrong because of legal malpractice what then, "a do over"?
RidgeHunter said:Meh, she's married to a dude who speaks out against oral secks. She deserves some pain and suffering money.
Enter your email address to join: