lining the pockets of trial lawyers

[Guest guest]

Steve,

While "lining the pockets of trial lawyers" may be a politically correct complaint, most trial lawyers in this country are just doing a job, and trust me, not getting rich off of it. Sure there are some bad apples - just like every other profession. Moreover, especially when it comes to big pharmaceutical companies, litigation is sometimes the ONLY way to cause change. Otherwise why would certain powers in Congress have tried so hard, and so secretively, to insulate those companies from litigation?

I stand by my husband's and my right to take what ever means necessary to help our young autistic son. And yes, we are both successful trial lawyers, but certainly not rich.

Politically correct slogans straight off the campaign trail do not constitute sound arguments, and thus, only hurt one's credibility.

[Guest guest]

Point taken, and I apologize for any offense.

I also stand by your right to defend your autistic child - it is a

foundational right we all have as citizens of our great country.

I am only saying that I will not join in such a suit - I am not

trying to convince others to take my position.

My opinion is based on the idea that, in many cases, punitive

damages awarded in these types of circumstances, while they seem to

be paid by the offending parties, are actually paid by the public at

large. Let's say that there is a $100M settlement or award. This

amount is miniscule compared to what I acutally think a true result

would look like, but just for the sake of argument I am offerng this

figure. So Big Pharma has to pay this. Where does the money come

from? Is it added to the price of toher drugs they sell, so others

are negatively impacted? Does it come from the R & D budget of other

drug research, whose results could potentially be very benign? Does

their medical re-insurance coverage pay for it, so insurance rates

overall are increased in all forms of insurance due to the impact on

actuarial data?

My position against this type of litigation is probably influenced

heavily by the fact that I own and operate a medium sized business

in California, where the laws are stacked against my organization

and the " sharks " are always circling, threatening litigation over

any move we make.

I was erroneous in making a broad-stroke accusation against trial

lawyers in general, and I apologize for offending you.

Steve

-- In EOHarm , " Theriot " <lauratheriot@...>

wrote:

>

> Steve,

> While " lining the pockets of trial lawyers " may be a politically

correct

> complaint, most trial lawyers in this country are just doing a

job, and

> trust me, not getting rich off of it. Sure there are some bad

apples - just

> like every other profession. Moreover, especially when it comes

to big

> pharmaceutical companies, litigation is sometimes the ONLY way to

cause

> change. Otherwise why would certain powers in Congress have tried

so hard,

> and so secretively, to insulate those companies from litigation?

> I stand by my husband's and my right to take what ever means

necessary to

> help our young autistic son. And yes, we are both successful

trial lawyers,

> but certainly not rich.

> Politically correct slogans straight off the campaign trail do not

> constitute sound arguments, and thus, only hurt one's

credibility.

>

>

[Guest guest]

The public at large pays for a lot of things they disagree with and wish they didn't have to pay for. The best example is the war in Iraq(for me, anyway). maurinerobin nemeth <r_nemeth@...> wrote: My opinion is based on the idea that, in many cases, punitive damages awarded in these types of circumstances, while they seem to be paid by the offending parties, are actually paid by the public at large. scd7131 <steve.dionnecalamericas> wrote: . That is why I would like to see people serving prison sentences.

Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the new .com

[Guest guest]

Because we want to see people serving prison sentences, the whole issue is much less likely to be resolved. Maybe you could grant amnesty to most except those who engaged in horrendously willful conduct. But that will always be tempered by the utilitarian (greater good) construct. This is more readily resolved in a civil action, but even that is extremely difficult given the fact that those who control the element of causation won't budge and completely corrupt the issue.

Spread the risk over society, give a tax credit to the damaged families and move the issue along. Clean house at the FDA and CDC.

If the government can spend $2 trillion on the Iraqdebacle, they can come up with a tax credit for the families.

Re: Re: "lining the pockets of trial lawyers"

My opinion is based on the idea that, in many cases, punitive damages awarded in these types of circumstances, while they seem to be paid by the offending parties, are actually paid by the public at large. scd7131 <steve.dionnecalamericas> wrote:

.. That is why I would like to see people serving prison sentences.

[Guest guest]

Excellent points.

> .

>

>

>

> That is why I would like to see people serving prison sentences.

>

[Guest guest]

I don't understand why the issue is less likely to be resolved if there are prison sentences involved than if there is money involved. It seems to me that with the money involved, the problem continues on on and on and on if only there is more and more money raised to cover it up and sweep it under the carpet. There is always going to be more money. > > Because we want to see people serving prison sentences, the whole issue is much less likely to be resolved.

[Guest guest]

The point I was trying to make was that there are many families who need money now more than they need to see justice eventually.

Most of the people in this debacle are simply part of institutional corruption and are not evil per se. They are so screwed up they actually think they are doing right by their positions.

Trying to get the government to use its own resources to prove that it poisoned a generation of children is, I believe, a working in futility.

You will simply get more and more lies and corrupted research. It has to be that way, because that is what they have to do, given what they have done. And in this instance, they view themselves on the line. How do you convince the Police Commissioner, after he's murdered his wife, to give himself in and make/prosecute the case against himself? We'll be screaming about their corrupted research from here to eternity.

We've seen that the Republicans have been horribly corrupt on this issue. And the Democrats may be worse because this goes to the heart of their political philosophy. This is existential crisis time for Democrats who believe in big government programs and universal healthcare. Unless you get a third party, you're not going to clear the standoff.

Just throwing out some ideas to break up the logjam.

Tax credits should be quickly doable. And allows them to amortize the costs over a number of years.

The rest of the battle will flow from that, including litigation, etc.

Re: Re: "lining the pockets of trial lawyers"

I don't understand why the issue is less likely to be resolved if there are prison sentences involved than if there is money involved. It seems to me that with the money involved, the problem continues on on and on and on if only there is more and more money raised to cover it up and sweep it under the carpet. There is always going to be more money.

>> Because we want to see people serving prison sentences, the whole issue is much less likely to be resolved.