What Part of a Contract Do People Not Understand?

[legion]

Originally posted by pbs911
As an attorney who reads and interprets contractual rights for a living, I think I know what I'm talking about. So do my clients for whom I recovered over 10m this last year.

So you are a plaintiff's attorney?

That explains a lot.

Thank you for making the price of every product I buy more expensive so that you can fight for "consumer rights" (i.e. line your pockets). Thank you for making my health insurance rates quadruple in the five years I've been working. Thank you for making sure that everything I do has a form, a procedure, and a waiver because of lawsuit fears. Thank you for making every product I buy come with dozens fancy little warning stickers to tell me things I couldn't figure out like I shouldn't try to change the blade on my lawnmower while it is running. Thank you for convincing the general populace that even the most minor of injuries is grounds for a lawsuit and a windfall settlement (minus a 30% fee, of course). Thank you for letting the public know that tobacco companies, carmakers, and insurance companies are only in business to kill, mislead, and make lots of money (wow, lawyers would never do these things) and don't actually provide any goods or services that help society to function.

This is the third draft of this post. It is very restrained compared to the earlier drafts.

[turbo6bar]

If State Farm is required to pay, they should start charging prison-rape prices for any properties in hurricane-prone areas. I've heard South Florida insurance prices are skyrocketing. In one instance, the insurance premium went from $4000 four years ago to $8500 today with assurances of an increase to $10-12k in the future. Insurance companies refuse to lose money. It is against their religion.

[Nathans_Dad]

Go legion!!

[RallyJon]

If State Farm is required to pay, they should start charging prison-rape prices for any properties in hurricane-prone areas.

Agreed. This is the real solution, not deceptive policy wording.

[pbs911]

Originally posted by legion
So you are a plaintiff's attorney?

That explains a lot.

Thank you for making the price of every product I buy more expensive so that you can fight for "consumer rights" (i.e. line your pockets). Thank you for making my health insurance rates quadruple in the five years I've been working. Thank you for making sure that everything I do has a form, a procedure, and a waiver because of lawsuit fears. Thank you for making every product I buy come with dozens fancy little warning stickers to tell me things I couldn't figure out like I shouldn't try to change the blade on my lawnmower while it is running. Thank you for convincing the general populace that even the most minor of injuries is grounds for a lawsuit and a windfall settlement (minus a 30% fee, of course). Thank you for letting the public know that tobacco companies, carmakers, and insurance companies are only in business to kill, mislead, and make lots of money (wow, lawyers would never do these things) and don't actually provide any goods or services that help society to function.

This is the third draft of this post. It is very restrained compared to the earlier drafts.

Your misinformed rant is very easily turned around. . .
I am sure that you would never suggest anyone who is maimed, killed, cheated, or defrauded should seek compensation. Your right, companies like ELRON should never have to pay for their wrongs, Ford should never have to pay for knowingly place into the stream of commerce a lifethreatening vehicle.

[Nathans_Dad]

You mean Enron?? Who is ELRON?? Some evil all knowing alien who maims people for a living? All hail ELRON!!

As an attorney, you really should learn to type better...

[RallyJon]

ELRON. You know, Elron Hubbard. Suing the Church of Scientology--now there's a noble calling for an attorney.

[Nathans_Dad]

There was an Elroy on the Jetsons...cute little kid. Never knew he grew up to be an evil maiming alien...

[island_dude]

This thread caused me to pull out my house insurance policy. Sure enough, in black and white: They don't cover flood damage. Wind damage is covered. I have Geico (so I can't speak for all of the others), and the policy is pretty clear on this one point.

Frankly, unless he can show that the damage (or at least a large part of it) is due to wind alone, he has no chance.

Its true that some insurance companies do not willingly pay out when they are obligated, that is pretty lousy. Somehow I doubt that his insurance is on the hook for much of this loss. Besides, I thought Bush made it a point of saying he would rebuild his house. Trent's got no worries.

[pbs911]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
You mean Enron?? Who is ELRON?? Some evil all knowing alien who maims people for a living? All hail ELRON!!

As an attorney, you really should learn to type better...

I dictate. My secretary types. I don't need to know how to type. I'm not a typist nor do I ever intend to become one. I guess the old saying is correct - when you can't attack the argument attack the person making the argument.

[competentone]

Originally posted by pbs911
Your misinformed rant is very easily turned around. . .
I am sure that you would never suggest anyone who is maimed, killed, cheated, or defrauded should seek compensation. Your right, companies like ELRON should never have to pay for their wrongs, Ford should never have to pay for knowingly place into the stream of commerce a lifethreatening vehicle.

Extremely sloppy language for an attorney -- and I'm so poor with my language skills that I rarely see other's errors!

I also do not think that Legion is suggesting that there is never a case for a lawsuit. There are plenty of circumstances where people are grossly negligent and deserve to be sued. At the same time, with my wife in law school right now, I (and she) are developing an even greater disdain for the disgusting and idiotic suits some lawyers are willing to bring. The suits are clearly not intent on "making victims whole," but are brought by greedy lawyers whose only motive is to line their own pockets.

This case sound like one of those.

[Superman]

Remember, pbs, that to some folks, "freedom" means businesses being free from taxes, free to exploit, not required to clean up their messes, not liable to working men and women, not liable to customers, etc.

See, that's your problem. I suspect you imagine that it's about people. People are not ends in themselves. They are only a means to a further end......earnings.

[Nathans_Dad]

Kudos to PBS on a post with correct spelling!! I was looking at the keyboard and the N and L aren't even close so that leads me to think you really thought the company was named ELRON...

All Hail ELRON!!

Supe-- Give it a rest man, seriously. No one here is saying that people should be prohibited from suing a company. There are plenty of cases that should be litigated. The problem is that the lawyers in this country have taken a once proud profession and turned it into what we see during the commercial breaks of the Jerry Springer show. Too many lawyers and not enough real lawsuits to go around so they invent some. Problem is that everyone pays for the frivolous lawsuits. Hence the current medical malpractice insurance crisis across the country.

It's only a matter of time before the gubmint will step in and regulate lawyers the way they regulated physicians with HMOs. The lawyers made their beds, now they get to lay in them.

[legion]

Let me explain insurance here, as there seems to be a lot of misconceptions.

Insurance protects certain things against certain risks. The things protected, and the risk protected against are defined in the policy. Think of insurance like a shield. A shield may be useful against arrows, but not a howitzer.

In order for insurance to work, both the things protected and the things protected from must be defined. Essentially, you take all of the things protected and calculate the cost of fixing them. Let's say you protect 100 things and they cost $1 each to fix. Then you multiply this times the likelyhood of fixing the things protected. Let's say that 20% of the things protected are likely to need fixing. This means that $20 must be collected to cover the expected repairs for the group. You divide this figure by the number of things protected, and each thing will cost $2 to protect.

If you introduce a new risk, you have broken the formula. Let's say someone comes in and says that now you must protect against things being lost, not just broken. You expect that for every 100 things protected, 30% will be lost. You now need to collect $5 for every thing protected. But wait, you are being told to protect things that have already been lost, and you cannot collect additional money to cover them...

[competentone]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
It's only a matter of time before the gubmint will step in and regulate lawyers the way they regulated physicians with HMOs. The lawyers made their beds, now they get to lay in them.

The government is made up of lawyers, so don't hold your breath waiting for that one!

[Nathans_Dad]

Good point...

BTW, I actually was open to consider voting for the Democratic ticket last election till I saw who the VP candidate was. With Edwards as VP no tort reform would EVER occur.

[legion]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
It's only a matter of time before the gubmint will step in and regulate lawyers the way they regulated physicians with HMOs. The lawyers made their beds, now they get to lay in them.

One can only hope, but they contribute so much money to the Democratic Party (and they are most of the politicians from that party). They will never let that happen. Every time some sort of law is proposed at the state level, the bar association runs doom and gloom adds about how this will cause the loss of all recourse when the little guy is trampled on, how this is the end of personal freedom, etc...

[pbs911]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
Kudos to PBS on a post with correct spelling!! I was looking at the keyboard and the N and L aren't even close so that leads me to think you really thought the company was named ELRON...

All Hail ELRON!!

Assuming makes you an @ss, and so do your posts. Trying to discuss anything with someone who bases the merits on spelling and grammer is futile. End of discussion.

[legion]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
BTW, I actually was open to consider voting for the Democratic ticket last election till I saw who the VP candidate was. With Edwards as VP no tort reform would EVER occur.

Exactly. How many former trial lawyers are currently in the senate? It only takes one to filibuster...

[RallyJon]

What makes this lawsuit even more shocking is that Trent Lott is/was a hard core right wing Republican. I guess that, corrollary to the old saying that a Republican is a Democrat who's been mugged, a plaintiff can be a former anti-trial lawyer Republican who's been tort(ed).