Most people on here are clearly the types who deride Edwards simply for being an "ambulance chasing trial lawyer" but of course that's because they're simply parroting back the drivel they've been spoonfed all their lives. Here's a summary of Edwards' most famous case:
John prosecuted a claim on behalf of a 3 yo girl whose intestines were literally sucked out of her body when she sat down over a powerful suction pump in a kiddie pool which was inadequately covered by a flimsy plastic piece, leaving her dependent on medical assistance which would cost her and her family millions of dollars during her lifetime.
Testimony from pool design expert witnesses showed that a sturdy suction cover could have been provided at a cost of only an additional 25 CENTS, yet the defendants chose to utilize the flimsy plastic piece TO SAVE A MEASLY 25 CENTS PER PUMP.
That's how much businesses care about you. Your safety wouldn't be worth 25 CENTS to them if it weren't for people like Edwards.
2007-06-01
03:38:47
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Oh yeah right Sherilynne, you don't agree with my viewpoint so I must be lying. How typical. Well here's a link for you:
http://www.monkeytime.org/lakey.html
And oops, I did get one of the facts wrong. The girl was 5 yo, not 3.
2007-06-01
03:55:09 ·
update #1
That prior comment was meant for lobo, but this is for you Sherilynne.
I don't know how much Edwards got for his fee, but it was probably 40% of the recovery plus his expenses.
Edwards ended up recovering about $31 million for the girl, so his fee would have been about $13 million. Given that the company only offered $100k to settle before trial and the girl probably would have gotten nothing at all without Edwards' help, it would seem that the girl got about $15 million more than she would have if she hadn't agreed to pay John his fee.
You wanna take a guess if the girl's family is happy they paid John his fee to help them?
2007-06-01
04:02:41 ·
update #2
I thought his most famous case was the one where while delivering his summary to the jury, Edwards said, "I have to tell you right now — I didn't plan to talk about this — right now I feel her [Jennifer], I feel her presence...[Jennifer's] inside me and she's talking to you."
2007-06-01 03:45:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mark B 5
·
1⤊
6⤋
I am always amused by people who think that contingent fee lawyers are evil. In most states, the fee for a child's case is not even agreed to by the lawyer and the client, because, after all, the child is not legally competent to buy toothpaste, let alone hire a lawyer for a multi-million-dollar case. The rate is set by the court at the end of the trial or when the compromise is approved, and it's almost always less than the one-third that adult cases pay. In New York, it's never more than 25%, and most states cap the fee even lower.
For every case that pays off, there are ten that fail completely or that don't recover the expenses (investigators, engineers, doctors, depositions) that the lawyer has to advance. But the successful cases, the cases that promote safety and health and also pump money into the system to keep the plaintiff's bar going...those outrage the conservatives. Especially conservatives from Connecticut, the state that is owned by the Hartford Insurance Group and its cronies.
But I'll tell you what, O Paragons of Republican virtue: the next time you're hurt in an accident, tell your white shoe corporate attorney that you want him and not some down-at-the-heels crusader, to handle the case. Then sit back and watch the guy refuse because he's conflicted (because his partners represent the manufacturer or the insurance company) or, if you're really unlucky, he will take the case and blow it to a fair-thee-well because he has no credibility with the jury, no sense of drama, and no fire in his gut for justice.
Or even better: you don't like trial lawyers? Cool, next time, ask the insurance company what's appropriate, and accept the two cents that they will throw on the floor.
2007-06-01 06:41:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is a good story. What I don't like is Mr. Edwards politicising Hurricane Katrina to announce his running for president. He is implying that it was Bush's fault for the way things occurred after Katrina. For the people that know the facts, the problems in Louisiana are the fault of the horribly corrupt politicians including the governor(s), the mayor of New Orleans, and the local Senators/Representatives who are mostly Democrats. There is still Millions of dollars yet to be distributed to the victims that are tied up in red tape due to the local politicians.
But despite this, Edwards tries to politicise this for his benefit, and try to imply it is Bush's fault? Maybe Edwards is this super nice guy....great.....but I don't trust him as a politician
2007-06-01 05:02:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by StevieB 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, most just parrot the pundits and have no idea that Edward was not what is referred to as an ambulance chaser. Edwards sued big corporations on behalf of the little guy. He was very good at it and very successful. I think that is the reason he has a hard time getting any more coverage in the media and any more attention in the political arena because big corporations own the media and they lobby the politicians so they own them too.
2007-06-01 03:44:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
0⤋
But he's a lawyer!!!
You know, like 90% of the rest of Washington.
I like Edwards, but the way politics works today, he might already be done. He could actually end poverty, but the average mouth-breathing voter sees only "the haircut guy" that the GOP slime machine wants them to see.
The average voter is too lazy to research anyone's issues between reruns of Scarred. That's why you still hear 9/11-Iraq links even after they have been roundly discounted. They repeat it, it gets on TV=it's truth. It could work for Giuliani and Giuliani would make Bush look like an enlightened, wise environmentalist centrist.
2007-06-01 03:47:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Schmorgen 6
·
4⤊
1⤋
I remember that case. Horrible what happened to that little girl. John Edwards is a good man I don't care what they say about his haircuts. I do wish people would quit letting opportunists to spoon feed them bs about certain politicians.
2007-06-01 03:49:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by Enigma 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
But, but, but....he spent a lot of money on a haircut. I am from NC and have met Edwards a couple of times. He and his wife seem like genuinely good human beings.
2007-06-01 03:46:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
What I'd really like is a summation of George Bush's most brilliant case as a trial lawyer.
....Oh wait...
>ahem<
2007-06-01 03:41:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Mr. Vincent Van Jessup 6
·
8⤊
0⤋
You didn't include Edwards fee. How much and what percentage of the settlement did he charge this poor girl?
I didn't say you were lying! I just asked about his fee. Ambulance chasers don't work for free. He wouldn't have taken the case for the good of the girl, he took it for the fee.
2007-06-01 03:46:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
8⤋
I'd like to see the one where he was talking to a dead baby"saying help get me money" think he got millions for that one Great guy and nice hair!
2007-06-01 03:45:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
7⤋