- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: YouTube series focuses on the Louisiana trial lawyer scam
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:35 am to The Johnny Lawrence
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:35 am to The Johnny Lawrence
Excellent post.
I think judges are the main source of the problem, which is a reflection of the citizens. St. Tammany is considered a pretty plaintiff-adverse jurisdiction because of the judges elected. Of course, if you’re a fairly connected PI attorney you can still get a good case through here and there, wink wink nod nod.
Also don’t forget the Dr.’s expert witness fees for deposition and testimony. Another payola.
I think judges are the main source of the problem, which is a reflection of the citizens. St. Tammany is considered a pretty plaintiff-adverse jurisdiction because of the judges elected. Of course, if you’re a fairly connected PI attorney you can still get a good case through here and there, wink wink nod nod.
Also don’t forget the Dr.’s expert witness fees for deposition and testimony. Another payola.
0
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:37 am to eScott
quote:
chiropractor
Every single one of these I've encountered have been pure scumbags. I despise them more than plaintiff attorneys.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:43 am to eScott
quote:
The losing attorney should have to pay the winning attorneys fees and court cost.
While this may sound like a good idea in theory, it would actually have the opposite affect and would actually encourage more of these suits.
Very rarely is there an actually dispute over causation of the injury. These cases almost always revolve around the extent of the injury and damages. Because causation is generally not at issue, the plaintiff is almost always going to “win,” even if it’s a couple thousand dollars. Now you just put the defendant on the hook for the plaintiffs attorneys fees and court costs in nearly every PI case.
This post was edited on 6/25/20 at 9:47 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:45 am to ZIGG
Current laws should be enforced to stop this scam:
1 - Personal injury attorneys should be prosecuted for directing medical treatment
2 - Health care providers should be prosecuted for providing unnecessary medical treatment
3 - the presumption of an injury being caused by an accident is bad law and essentially unconstitutional (the Housley presumption effectively allows for someone to be deprived of property without a fair process).
4 - the testimony from plaintiff doctors that indicates a degenerative condition was aggrivated by an accident, which is based purely on a plaintiff's self-reported pain history should be excluded because it is junk science.
1 - Personal injury attorneys should be prosecuted for directing medical treatment
2 - Health care providers should be prosecuted for providing unnecessary medical treatment
3 - the presumption of an injury being caused by an accident is bad law and essentially unconstitutional (the Housley presumption effectively allows for someone to be deprived of property without a fair process).
4 - the testimony from plaintiff doctors that indicates a degenerative condition was aggrivated by an accident, which is based purely on a plaintiff's self-reported pain history should be excluded because it is junk science.
This post was edited on 6/25/20 at 9:45 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:54 am to SlidellCajun
quote:
It’s unethical.
The hell they are, you got a link?
ANd if the guy can't work what's wrong with feeding him and his family?
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:57 am to TigerGman
quote:
ANd if the guy can't work what's wrong with feeding him and his family?
If these suits were about feeding families nobody would have an issue with them. You are well aware that most of these suits go FARRRRRRRRR beyond providing for families.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:02 am to TigerGman
quote:
ANd if the guy can't work what's wrong with feeding him and his family?
HAHAHA. .0000001% of cases.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:10 am to Dandaman
This reform stuff is total BS. Nothing will get better with these BS "reforms". The people who are excited about giving up your rights without anything guaranteed in return are a bunch of fools. I remember when Mike Foster made insurance companies reduce rates when they passed the last tort reform. We are paying some really cheap auto insurance aren't we folks?
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:11 am to Sentrius
JBE not gonna be happy
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:13 am to Dandaman
Agreed. I don’t think you go far enough - prosecute ANYONE, lawyer or client, who files a lawsuit and loses. (This doesn’t apply to businesses of course.). If they want to appeal, they get a three judge panel sponsored by Exxon and Allstate.
This post was edited on 6/25/20 at 10:15 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:16 am to ZIGG
The problem with PI trial lawyers is that they are about nothing other than a transfer of wealth through judicial means. Typically in a PI suit it is the attorney (s) who win.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:18 am to NIH
Trial lawyers getting rich while insurance companies and insurance company executives are stuck in the poor house
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:23 am to Dandaman
quote:
essentially unconstitutional (the Housley presumption effectively allows for someone to be deprived of property without a fair process).
LMAO? WTF? A presumption is unconstitutional? You're gonna have to rewrite a whole bunch of laws fella.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:24 am to Jimmy2shoes
quote:
The people who are excited about giving up your rights without anything guaranteed in return are a bunch of fools.
What rights are you giving up? Please be specific.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:24 am to boosiebadazz
I’m sick of it. I like where this guy’s head is at. We need to make the civil tort system RACKET done with. How do we do that? We put these people in jail.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:27 am to boosiebadazz
Two comments: "which chiropractors"? Drive around B.R. or the West Bank in N.O. as 2 small examples. The ones you see on billboards are all plaintiff whores. As well, these types of trial lawyers do not give a shite about any criticism directed their way, they have no morals, let alone a conscious. They certainly do not care about the "little people" . The little people do not get past the call screeners. It's all about the $$$$$ to them.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:27 am to boosiebadazz
Absolutely every person in the system is making money.
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff attorneys
Defense attorneys
Chiropractors
Pain management doctors
Surgeons
Judges
Insurance executives
Paralegals
Secretaries
Court reporters
The people getting the shaft are those paying premiums.
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff attorneys
Defense attorneys
Chiropractors
Pain management doctors
Surgeons
Judges
Insurance executives
Paralegals
Secretaries
Court reporters
The people getting the shaft are those paying premiums.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:27 am to Broyota2
quote:
Single handedly fricked LAs auto insurance rates. We have the 2nd highest rates in the country and they continue to climb 50% faster than the national average.
Question. If the insurance industry was handed a bill that gave them everything they were looking for, why would they not commit on the record to a reduction in insurance premiums?
If there is such an iron clad unassailable correlation between jury threshold amounts, collateral source, liability presumptions, lack of seat belt use as proof of comparative fault, etc., then once these things are addressed by the legislature, shouldn't insurance companies agree on the record to some reduction without question?
They didn't.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:36 am to Demshoes
Follow up question is why did they kill bills in committee that would have looked at their underwriting practices?
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:41 am to Demshoes
quote:
f there is such an iron clad unassailable correlation between jury threshold amounts, collateral source, liability presumptions, lack of seat belt use as proof of comparative fault, etc., then once these things are addressed by the legislature, shouldn't insurance companies agree on the record to some reduction without question?
Simple solution to all this--Loser pays attorney fees. PI attorneys will be terrified to take marginal cases to court and Insurance companies will not want to low ball good cases.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News