Example of Supermans' "Workers Paradise"

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad

Now, if I met one and they told me they were personal injury, medical malpractice, etc., I'd probly walk away.

That's what I meant, I wonder what the ratio is?

[Rodeo]

Hmmmm ... so Rick hates personal injury lawyers, as does daddy. But daddy would have every person hurt on the job in America go searching for a personal injury lawwyer to bring a tort claim if their employer's or co-worker's negligence caused the injury.

Sounds like a "perfect storm" of *****.

Anyway, maybe Mul can give some recommendations ... I hear he was out to hire one of the dreaded personal injury lawyers ...

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Hmmmm ... so Rick hates personal injury lawyers, as does daddy. But daddy would have every person hurt on the job in America go searching for a personal injury lawyer to bring a tort claim if their employer's or co-worker's negligence caused the injury.

Sounds like a "perfect storm" of *****.

Anyway, maybe Mul can give some recommendations ... I hear he was out to hire one of the dreaded personal injury lawyers ...

No, the system should have an impartial arbitrator, then lawyers upon dispute. BTW, why do you think the guy in my case got a lawyer? The system requires the leaches either way.

[Nathans_Dad]

No, I don't hate them. Hate is an emotion that requires deep personal insult. I don't think you can truly hate someone you don't know.

I just think they are the leeches on the arse of America, sucking the lifeblood out of this country for their own selfish gain.

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
No, I don't hate them. Hate is an emotion that requires deep personal insult. I don't think you can truly hate someone you don't know.

I just think they are the leeches on the arse of America, sucking the lifeblood out of this country for their own selfish gain.

LOL

What he said

[tobster1911]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Yes she can.

Just a little hint, you are WAY too easy to get wound up. It was a joke. That is why Len has a Goat below his name.

Originally posted by Rodeo
Pardon me for not explaining to you the procedures of a wrongful death suit, but I doubt you'd listen anyway....

Ok, school's out.

We are not talking about a wrongful death. That would necessitate some FAILING on the part of the airline. To make your example similar to Len's; you would have to hold the airline liable even though NO fault was ever shown. You are assuming the wrongful part with nothing to back it.


P.S. Yes, everyone hates lawyers........they are an unfortunately necessary evil forced on us by a system that exists only to perpetuate itself. (It's a joke, get it?)

[legion]

Originally posted by tobster1911
But, lets assume that they were just hurt not killed. It goes back to what everyone was saying about natural hazards of the job. IF you work on an airplane there is a natural risk of crashing. You as a passenger assume this same risk. You must have proof (not just claim) that the proper procedures were not followed before it becomes anyone else's fault. This is exactly Len's point. He even stated that he would not mind paying if the injury was truly his fault.

Actually, in cases like this, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor (the thing speaks for itself) is invoked. Basically, this shifts the burden from the plaintiff, who normally has to prove that the defendent is negligent, to the defendent, who now has to prove that he wasn't negligent. The basic theory is that because the plane crashed, someone must have been negligent.

[speeder]

There is plenty not to like about any legal system, even the best one in the world. Ours. People tend to express hate and fear the most at things they do not understand, the "solutions" presented here by the deep thinkers of the board prove this.

[artplumber]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Two points and I think we have reached the end of the line here.
....

So much for that....
(Eveready batteries) "Just keeps going & going"

Originally posted by Rodeo
(I'm actually serious about that, it's a legal contest, why would an employer or employee want to go though the legal system without guidance and advice)

Originally posted by legion
res ipsa loquitor (the thing speaks for itself)

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by lendaddy
No, the system should have an impartial arbitrator

Um ... what should we call that person? Hmmmmm. I know! How about "judge?"

Originally posted by lendaddy
then lawyers upon dispute.

Now, what should we call this process when the parties can't agree to settle their dispute among themselves? Hmmmmm.

I know, how about "trial?"

That's a heck of a system you designed to get around the current system of judges, lawyers and trials!! Speeder's right, you're pretty sharp!

[speeder]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
I don't hate lawyers. Some of them, like prosecutors, tax lawyers, corporate law, etc. are pretty ok. In other words if I met them at a party and they said they were a corporate lawyer I'd probly say "Wow, cool."

Now, if I met one and they told me they were personal injury, medical malpractice, etc., I'd probly walk away.

My Dad was a trial lawyer and you would never get a chance to talk to him at a party because you are just too ******* boring. You'd be over in the corners w/ the "cool" tax lawyers and CPAs. Wow. You could probably bore the balls off a brass monkey, pal.

[legion]

One good thing about trial lawyers is they do bore easily...often with their nice new sports cars.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
I just think they are the leeches on the arse of America, sucking the lifeblood out of this country for their own selfish gain.

I truly hope that neither you nor anyone you love is injured or killed because of someone else's negligence, greed, or recklessness. If, god forbid, that ever happens, you will want to hold the person or company that caused your misery responsible. And you will realize that there are some bad actors out there, people that will put you and everyone else in danger for the sake of a few extra cents profit per unit, and that they will do everything possible to deny your demand for justice.

Then you'll go find one of these "leeches" to get the justice you deserve.

There are plenty of bad actors in the legal ranks, your foolishness is in thinking that's the only place they live.

[legion]

This is the thread that never ends.
It just goes on and on my friend...

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Um ... what should we call that person? Hmmmmm. I know! How about "judge?"



Now, what should we call this process when the parties can't agree to settle their dispute among themselves? Hmmmmm.

I know, how about "trial?"

That's a heck of a system you designed to get around the current system of judges, lawyers and trials!! Speeder's right, you're pretty sharp!

LOL, your lack of comprehension is staggering. No, when a workplace injury occurs it must be reported immediately, an arbitrator decides if this should be filed as employer negligence or not. No leaches....er lawyers to this point. If after that the at fault party disagrees then they can lawyer up and enter the current system.

This allows for the non negligent employer to be off the hook for things that are not his fault. There is currently no remedy for this.


This logic evades you?

[lendaddy]

I have needed a personal injury attorney and he was a leach. All he cared about was getting his cut a quickly as possible. I wanted to go to trial he wanted to settle, I finally caved out of frustration.

The fact that I needed to file suit against another party for legitimate reasons does not say anything about my charactor.

The fact that someone files a lifetime of continuous suits against people they know or believe are faultless purely for the financial gain does say something about theirs.

And just because they sometimes have honest and worthy clients does not cleanse their hands.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by lendaddy
LOL, your lack of comprehension is staggering. No, when a workplace injury occurs it must be reported immediately, an arbitrator decides if this should be filed as employer negligence or not. No leaches....er lawyers to this point. If after that the at fault party disagrees then they can lawyer up and enter the current system.

This allows for the non negligent employer to be off the hook for things that are not his fault. There is currently no remedy for this.


This logic evades you?

No, your logic is truly stunning.

If the "impartial arbitrator" (we won't call him a judge) tells the unrepresented worker he doesn't have a case, in the context of some proceeding where the parties but not lawyers can present evidence so the "impartial arbitrator" actually can make an informed decision, and if the unrepresented worker decides that's cool with him, he didn't want the money or surgery or lifelong therapy anyway, your system works beautifully. Fast and streamlined and easy.

Like I said, you are sharp. You have designed a system that if everyone agrees there is no need for a case, it goes really easily

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
You have designed a system that if everyone agrees there is no need for a case, it goes really easily

Holy **** you might be getting it! If the employee does not claim it was the employers fault it goes though the standard medical insurance/lack thereof system. If the employee feels their employer is at fault it goes through roughly the current fukced up system. (except that now if the employer can show they were not negligent then it gets tossed back into the standard medical insurance system) Try to grasp that last part, it's really important.


There is hope for you yet! You've been going to night school haven't you? Good for you

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Holy **** you might be getting it! If the employee does not claim it was the employers fault it goes though the standard medical insurance/lack thereof system. If the employee feels their employer is at fault it goes through roughly the current fukced up system. (except that now if the employer can show they were not negligent then it gets tossed back into the standard medical insurance system) Try to grasp that last part, it's really important.

The scary part is I think you are actually serious.

If I were you, I'd leave the dispute resolution process to others ... I'm sure you're good with your hands or something

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Rodeo
The scary part is I think you are actually serious.

If I were you, I'd leave the dispute resolution process to others ... I'm sure you're good with your hands or something

So you don't get it? .......Well don't give up yet, everyone learns at their own pace