Comments on: The Trial of a WhiteCoat – Part 11

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:54:01 +0000

LTTP here, and I haven’t finished the series (so maybe this is covered), but: If Vinny wanted to you just sit there and take it while the defense slagged you off, then he should have said exactly that. i.e. “In their opening statement, they are going to trash you in every way possible. They will say flat-out that you’re an incompetent fool who shouldn’t be allowed within fifty feet of an ED. We *will* respond to this in our statement, so don’t feel that we’re letting the defense get away with anything if we don’t object to some vicious, baseless accusation.”

By: SeaSpray

SeaSpray — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 05:03:20 +0000

Oh my gosh…do I know how you felt!!!

By: Blawg Review #220

Blawg Review #220 — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:41:02 +0000

[...] White Coat has been serializing a first-person account of his malpractice trial; you can read parts eleven and twelve, bearing in mind that you’re coming in partway through the story. (The trial has [...]

By: Blawg Review #220

Blawg Review #220 — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 07:41:02 +0000

By: LL

LL — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 01:13:53 +0000

I didn’t bother to read the other comments. All I have to say is, although you went through a MASSIVE ordeal, this is fascinating to someone from the outside.

By: Supremacy Claus

Supremacy Claus — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 00:50:55 +0000

Matt: Do you support ending the privity obstacle? That is the question, today. If not, why not?

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:31:47 +0000

“The lawyers are the majority of legislators on both sides of the aisle, and will never vote for lawyer accountability. So there is no recourse for the victim of lawyer carelessness, which is most doctors falsely sued with weak claims. That leaves self-help, doesn’t it?”

It’s your cause, you have to make the call. Although given the number of states that have pushed through tort reform, I would think you had a shot. And, the number of lawyer legislators has declined significantly. At least the number of practicing ones, who would care about what you’re talking about.

By: Supremacy Claus

Supremacy Claus — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:02:51 +0000

The privity obstacle is not in any law. It is good old boys protecting their campaign donors from any accountability, in violation of the statutes delineating statutory duties. They feel free to disobey these statutes, because the rigging is airtight.

The lawyers are the majority of legislators on both sides of the aisle, and will never vote for lawyer accountability. So there is no recourse for the victim of lawyer carelessness, which is most doctors falsely sued with weak claims. That leaves self-help, doesn’t it?

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:50:27 +0000

SC, let me know when your bill comes up in state legislatures. We’ll talk then.

And personally, I think torts aren’t that great. I’d rather people just take responsibility for their actions on both sides and the need for tort claims would be eliminated.

By: Supremacy Claus

Supremacy Claus — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:39:40 +0000

I asked a question you refuse to answer. If torts are so great for everyone else, why are you immunizing lawyers and judges from their great benefits? Why will you not support ending the privity obstacle to a legal malpractice claim by the adverse third party? No one else has had that obstacle for 100 years. The lawyer has dozens of enumerated duties to the adverse third party in statutes.