When Eric Gottfried, the plaintiffs attorney, got the letter, his jaw dropped. Pain not an injury? In his response, Gottfried referred the defense lawyer to a “beginning tutorial on how ‘pain’ is central and essential to a personal injury lawsuit.” You can see the demand and response here: /DefendantsNonsense.pdf
The case seems to be a routine personal injury matter, as per Gottfried: Plaintiff is hit in the rear by the defendant in a car accident. Plaintiff has suffered a number of injuries, including a fractured nose (with surgery), three fractured vertebrae, fractured rib and rotator cuff injury, among others.
The tort “reformers” like to use anecdotes to “prove” that there are frivolous lawsuits. (Many of those cases, in turn, are pro se matters.) So here is the flip side: The most utterly worthless and frivolous legal argument that I can imagine coming out of a real law firm.
The difference, of course, is that defendants get paid to make frivolous arguments (when billing hourly) while plaintiffs lose time and money doing so (while using the contingency fee).
Links to this post:
is pain an injury?
yes, it is. the end. ok, not really. frivolous lawsuits are bad. just about everyone agrees on that, though there’s plenty of room for reasonable disagreement as to what makes a lawsuit frivolous. what we don’t hear about nearly as …posted by Andrew Dat @ August 24, 2009 4:53 PM
if frivolous lawsuits are bad, what about frivolous defenses?
we are always hearing about these evil, un-american frivolous lawsuits that threaten the very fabric of our society. ok, i get it. i dislike frivolous lawsuits as much as anybody. they devalue the claims of the truly injured, …posted by @ August 18, 2009 10:10 AM