- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:49 pm to Blutarsky
Are 30-40% higher rates worth it just to laugh about billboard lawyers?
Posted on 9/17/24 at 9:53 pm to Blutarsky
Loss of enjoyment of life compensates you if, due to the fault of the defendant, you can no longer do things like:
Play golf, hunt or fish, play catch with your grandkids, go for a hike or run, sit through a church service, take family vacations because being in a car or plane is too painful, wipe your own butt, etc.
Those are losses to you beyond the pain and suffering you experience just sitting around. If someone deprived you if those pleasures, do you not want the responsible party to compensate you for them?
Play golf, hunt or fish, play catch with your grandkids, go for a hike or run, sit through a church service, take family vacations because being in a car or plane is too painful, wipe your own butt, etc.
Those are losses to you beyond the pain and suffering you experience just sitting around. If someone deprived you if those pleasures, do you not want the responsible party to compensate you for them?
Posted on 9/18/24 at 3:33 am to Twenty 49
quote:
If someone deprived you if those pleasures, do you not want the responsible party to compensate you for them?
So many people here seem to hate justice.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 6:51 am to tigerpimpbot
quote:
So many people here seem to hate justice.
Last time I checked justice came in the form of a virtue and not a check for 6 or 7 figures where a plaintiff’s attorney will take half of that money anyway.
There is an old saying money doesn’t buy happiness unless you are a member of the bar. I added the last part because in the end the only winners in these cases are attorneys. They collect either way unless they are a plaintiff who bets on the wrong case taken on a contingency.
This post was edited on 9/18/24 at 6:32 pm
Posted on 9/18/24 at 7:24 am to Blutarsky
quote:
But this is the first time I heard of Loss of joy in Life.
That's been around for years
Posted on 9/18/24 at 7:30 am to geauxpurple
quote:
Loss of enjoyment of life has been a part of it forever. If you used to enjoy life but can't anymore because you are constantly in pain because of someone's negligence, you get compensation for that. It is a racket as long as it happens to someone else and not you.
Found the personal injury lawyer.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 7:50 am to Blutarsky
quote:
But this is the first time I heard of Loss of joy in Life.
It's generally loss of enjoyment of life. It's been around forever.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 7:53 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Everyone says that, until they need an attorney. Funny how that works.
and you "need" an attorney for all sorts of utter bullshite, mostly because the write the laws
racket
Posted on 9/18/24 at 8:01 am to RohanGonzales
quote:
and you "need" an attorney for all sorts of utter bullshite, mostly because the write the laws racket
We wish. Even when laws are written by attorneys, they are rarely written by attorneys who specialize in the subject matter area. We spend half our lives unraveling poorly constructed statutes that exist because some legislator’s cousin had some hyper specific situation that needed to be “fixed”, or some special interest got in a legislator’s ear about “an easy fix that’s been a big problem for the X Industry”, thus creating a half dozen more problems than previously existed.
Louisiana’s body of law is probably about 10x longer than it has any right to be, and believe me, the attorneys that practice in each of those areas aren’t the ones pushing for that status quo.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 8:12 am to Trout Bandit
Loss of consortium
Posted on 9/18/24 at 8:18 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Everyone says that, until they need an attorney
Y’all are literally florists
Y’all changed the laws to force people to hire a lawyer
Posted on 9/18/24 at 8:31 am to el Gaucho
Once upon a time it was not ethical for lawyers to advertise. I am sure the tv advertising folks love it.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 8:33 am to Blutarsky
And all Gordon has to do is shamelessly peddle more bible quotes to black people and the cash cow keeps flowing.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 9:15 am to Blutarsky
I was on a jury pool back in May for a car accident. The "victim's" lawyer of course was asking everyone in the jury pool about their views on car insurance, settlements, jury awards, etc. He brought up all the dollar amounts for past medical, future medical, etc that can be easily calculated. But then asked us each about the things that can't be easily substantiated, like "loss of enjoyment of life" and asked our opinions about whether we would be able to award his client substantial dollars for that.
When he asked me that, I replied that if I knew I could sue people for loss of enjoyment of life, then I have a list and we can discuss later.
Needless to say, I was not selected for that jury.
When he asked me that, I replied that if I knew I could sue people for loss of enjoyment of life, then I have a list and we can discuss later.
Needless to say, I was not selected for that jury.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 9:22 am to OlGrandad
quote:
Once upon a time it was not ethical for lawyers to advertise. I am sure the tv advertising folks love it.
That wasn’t a law change; the Supreme Court ruled it was unconstitutional.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 9:24 am to el Gaucho
quote:
Y’all are literally florists Y’all changed the laws to force people to hire a lawyer
I appreciate that I’m replying to Gaucho, but for anyone else reading: I’m sure there might be some niche scenario, but I can’t think of a single circumstance in which it is illegal for someone to represent themselves
Posted on 9/18/24 at 9:24 am to Blutarsky
quote:
But this is the first time I heard of Loss of joy in Life.
Back when I was a baby lawyer working in PI, "loss of enjoyment of life" was a standard damage on PI petitions. This was 2008-2009.
Posted on 9/18/24 at 10:14 am to Joshjrn
quote:
I appreciate that I’m replying to Gaucho, but for anyone else reading: I’m sure there might be some niche scenario, but I can’t think of a single circumstance in which it is illegal for someone to represent themselves
Yes but in a dispute the person who’s lawyer gives the biggest kickback to the judge wins
We used to not need judges then lawyers voted to make duels illegal
Posted on 9/18/24 at 10:21 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Everyone says that, until they need an attorney. Funny how that works.
We need attorneys because the other side has slimebag attorneys as well.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News