These lawyers claim to be good hearted individuals who are only interested in pursuing justice. To prove their commitment, they are willing to work for free until a favorable settlement is achieved. What cash poor accident victim could refuse such a noble proposition?
Please consider: Nobody works for free.
These lawyers are able to cherry pick their cases based upon how lucrative their practices are. No competent lawyer will accept a personal injury case unless they are sure of a settlement. Also consider that the lawyer will typically receive 60% of the settlement plus their expenses (taken off of the top). The kindly lawyer will end up receiving upwards of 70% of the settlement, leaving a miserable ~30% for the person who actually was injured (talk about adding insult to injury).
If you doubt me, then just try to hire a personal injury attorney on a hourly basis. They make so much more by working on "CONTINGENCY" that you won't have any takers.
2006-12-02 03:00:36 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Gunny T: You are incorrect. I am making no assumptions regarding juries, judges or attorneys in general. I am specificly questioning the motives and manner in which PERSONAL INJURY attorneys operate.
Sounds to me like you are making some assumptions yourself.
1) Are you absolutely positive that the plantiff's attny was working pro bono vs on contingency?
2) How do you know that the jury voted against a just decision in order to watch television?
It sounds to me as if you are a little biased as to your specific case. Perhaps you were the plantiff?
2006-12-02 04:43:33 · update #1
That's how shyster lawyer, John Edwards made his millions.
We are all paying higher health insurance and higher health care costs because of him.
2006-12-02 03:04:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
You are assuming all judges and juries are crearted equal... they are NOT.... I assisted in a federal civil action that should (morally) have netted the plaintif over 5 million. The atty for the plaintif worked his butt off (for nothing) even paid his own way to London to depose a witness.. The case was perfect, well thought out, with many precedents favoring the plaintiff. After hasty jury instructions at 5 pm on friday the jury found 100% for the defendant (so they wouldn't miss "The Simpsons").
2006-12-02 03:38:31 · answer #2 · answered by Gunny T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lawyers should be made personally and financially responsible for "ambulance chasing" and pilfering settlements, but paid and admired for noble work. It's an art
2006-12-02 03:12:07 · answer #3 · answered by C W 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like my lawyer, never did any personal injury though...he's a very nice man, but I pay for my groceries when I leave the store, so I pay my lawyer when I pick his brain.
2006-12-02 03:10:36 · answer #4 · answered by curious115 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
these guys definitely come off as sleazy, but if there weren't any bottom-feeders willing to take on whomever on contingency, than how would ppl who couldn't afford attys fees ever get justice?
but there are certainly negative impacts on the system to the extent that these ppl give their clients false hopes, behave unethically, annoy me with daytime tv ads that have the effect of degrading my entire profession, etc.
2006-12-02 04:40:08 · answer #5 · answered by carrot 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But, the first thing they will tell you is that without the lawyer, you'll most likely get nothing. I have more respect for the homeless drug addict bum on the street than these leaches. These people are not good...
2006-12-02 03:06:11 · answer #6 · answered by steinwald 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Very bad.
Amen birdsnake.
2006-12-02 03:07:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
AMEN ! I AGREE
2006-12-02 03:08:26 · answer #8 · answered by slickcut 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋