October 23rd, 2007

So How Did You Find Your Attorney? SueEasy!!!

A new legal website is in the making called SueEasy. It apparently hasn’t gone live yet, but let me be the first in the legal blogosphere to shred the idea as incredibly stupid. And further, that any attorney that participates for a personal injury case may be committing legal malpractice.

The story comes via Peter Lattman at the WSJ Law Blog a few days ago who got it from TechCrunch.

The website urges people to contact them with their complaints and post their confidential legal papers, and then attorneys they have never met, spoken with or vetted, will bid for their business and the winner will get the case.

Just think of the trial testimony, regarding conduct that takes place before any attorney-client privilege is created:

Defense Counsel: How did you find your counsel?
Client: I used a website called SueEasy.
Defense Counsel: What is that?
Client: I submit information to a website and lawyers bid for my case.
Defense Counsel: Lawyers you’ve never spoken with?
Client: Yes.
Defense Counsel: So your lawyer bid for your case before ever speaking with you?
Client: Yup.
Defense Counsel: Based on information you submitted before s/he was retained?
Client: Yup
Defense Counsel: And xyz wasn’t in the packet of information you sent in to SueEasy, was it?
Client: No.
Defense Counsel: So your lawyer was asking for this case without even knowing about xyz?
Client: Yes.

This kind of crap, presented ever so briefly here, can easily go on for a half-hour or more, all about how the client used some anonymous website — that pitches how easy it is to sue a company or person — provided limited information, and found an attorney willing to bid on the case on that basis.

If one is looking to distract from the merits of a personal injury case and help drive a nail into its coffin, then using such a website is a great idea.

According to TechCrunch:

The site is kind of a reverse directory for lawyers that’s sure to be a haven for personal injury lawsuits.

The biggest beneficiaries will no doubt be defense lawyers and insurance companies who will have a field day with anyone caught using such a system. Any case that is close on the merits is surely likely to suffer from any halfway decent cross examination.

And I think that any practitioner that uses it should make sure their professional liability premiums are fully paid up. While the client may not know better, the attorney should.

Addendum, 10/24/07:

(Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney in New York)

Links to this post:

is sueeasy the worst lawyer idea ever?
cross posted from new york personal injury law blog: when i first heard about sueeasy, i thought it was an april fool’s joke. but it was october when it first appeared as a development concept (see 10/23/07 post: so how did you find …

posted by Eric Turkewitz @ April 18, 2008 9:38 AM

october 25 roundup
lawyer for mothers against drunk driving: better not call yourself mothers against anything else without our say-so [phoenix new times]. ohio insurer agrees to refund $51 million in premiums, but it’s a mutual, so money’s more or less …
posted by @ October 25, 2007 1:07 AM

 

October 22nd, 2007

Medical Errors Caused by Communication Breakdown, Lack of Supervision

Poor communication is a major cause of medical malpractice, especially among staff in training, according to a study in today’s edition of the Archives of Internal Medicine. (See Medical News Today.)

Researchers examining 889 closed medical malpractice cases found that 27 percent involved trainees whose role in the error was considered to be at least moderately important, of which 87 percent involved residents. According to the Medical News Today summary:

Cognitive factors contributed to the majority of trainee errors, according to the study. Nearly three-fourths (72 percent) involved errors in judgment, more than half (58 percent) were caused by a lack of technical knowledge, and more than half (57 percent) were due to failure of vigilance or memory. Teamwork factors, notably lack of supervision and handoff problems, were also a significant issue, accounting for 70 percent of the cases involving trainee errors. A lack of supervision accounted for more than half (54 percent) of the trainee errors, and handoff problems accounted for nearly one-fifth (19 percent). Because multiple factors contributed to trainee errors, the percentages do not add up to 100 percent.

Further, attending physicians’ failure to oversee the work of trainees was identified as a factor in 82 percent of the 129 cases where a lack of supervision contributed to a medical error.

None of this comes as a surprise to medical malpractice practitioners, as the failure to properly communicate and supervise often comes up. The degree to which this is due to the high pressure of managed care, systems breakdowns, or simple sloppiness varies from case to case.

Since hand written notes in medical charts are a primary tool of communication from doctor to doctor, and since such writing is often unintelligible (sometimes even to the doctor that wrote it) you can be sure that communications problems will continue to exist to the detriment of patients.

On the web:
Archives of Internal Medicine (article not yet available online)

(Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney in New York, most of whose practice has been medical malpractice for the past 20 years.)

Links to this post:

hwr: the anti-halloween edition
you know us wonks and geeks, we just have to be different. so while it seems that every other “carnival” is touting scary monsters and yummy treats, we’re oiling up our sliderules and adjusting the paperclips holding our glasses …
posted by H G Stern, LUTCF, CBC @ November 01, 2007 8:00 AM

 

October 21st, 2007

Law Firm & Hair Replacement

One of my favorite Saturday Night Live commercial spoofs was for Shimmer. (It’s a dessert topping! No, It’s a floor wax!)

Well, now the law seems to have its own version. Mister Thorne over at his blog on legal writing, Set in Style, has discovered that the San Francisco firm of Wineberg Simmonds & Narita is offering both legal services and hair replacement.

Check with Mister Throne as to how he found it. If anyone knows of a more bizarre combo, I’d love to hear it.

No word yet on discounts for bald litigants who need both services.

 

October 19th, 2007

Personal Injury Law Round-Up #33

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog brings you the week that was:

We start, as always, with pre-litigation issues:

Adam Liptak in his Monday Sidebar column for the New York Times takes on the very high price of Google ads for attorneys, mostly those who deal with personal injury. Cited in the article are blawgospheric regulars Ted Frank, Walter Olson and Prof. William Childs. Oddly absent from the column is any interview with people who actually run the ads;

Following up on the Texas tort “reform” issue in the October 5th Times (see Texas Tort “Reform” and The New York Times and Personal Injury Law Round-Up #32), there are two letters to the editor worth noting: Kenneth E. Raske, President of the Greater New York Hospital Association printed in the Times and Jay Harvey from the Texas Trial Lawyers Association (which the Times apparently declined to run, but is offered via Bob Kraft’s P.I.S.S.D.);

And Stephanie Mencimer at The Tortellini points out that of all those docs heading into Texas, none seem to be going to the poor counties, just the rich ones already stocked with docs, with more on the subject from Perlmutter & Schuelke;

Kia Franklin at TortDeform has a piece on the White Coat of Silence, with medical practitioners at health care giant Kaiser Permanente being punished for reporting negligence concerns over their colleagues;

Anne Reed tackles the subject of ferreting out anti-Semitism in voir dire over at Deliberations, fresh on the heels of comments made by David Duke in drag while on the Donny Deutsch show;

Doctor Anonymous reports that a dentist charged with fondling the breasts of 27 women has his defense ready: It was medically necessary (via Kevin, M.D.).

And on to some actual litigation:

A federal judge has allowed suits against airlines to go forward that charge them with causing deep vein thrombosis when a passenger complained of pain from a cramped seat and was denied the opportunity to move to a less-cramped space (Justin Scheck, The Recorder, via Law.com);

New York’s high court has refused to recognize the independent tort of spoliation of evidence, according to Thomas Swartz at New York Legal Update;

In Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court said a podiatrist can not testify against an orthopedist in a bunion surgery case, according to Leon Aussprong (M.D., & J.D.) at his new Philadelphia Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog;

In New York, about 9,000 ground zero workers may be near a billion dollar settlement (Daily News via TortDeform);

That potential settlement comes as the first of the September 11 suits gets set for trial (see: September 11 Judge Says Families Should Settle And Move On) before Judge Alvin Hellerstein, in the Southern District of New York. He made pre-trial rulings on the damages phase for the remaining 16 claims — which will precede the liability phase in hopes of encouraging settlements — according to this New York Times report;

Colin Miller makes his Personal Injury Law Round-Up debut with a post at EvidenceProf regarding the suit against Lindsey Lohan, and the admissibility of a police report (I also note that under New York law the result he suggests would likely be different) (via TortsProf):

Last week a jury returned with a verdict of $134.5M in compensatory damages against Wyeth related to its hormone replacement drugs Prempro and Premarin (Personal Injury Round-Up #32). Then the jury said “Oops!” because it had included punitive damages in its award, and so it reduced the award by $100M. And what did they then do in the punitive phase? To no one’s surprise, they gave the money right back. (Howard Erichson at MassTorts, with more at Pharmalot);

Emergency room physician Shadowfox ruminates on a $5.4M medical malpractice verdict in the state of Washington over at Movin’ Meat, and says his first instinct is sympathy for the doctor, not the family of the decedent (via Overlawyered).

And finally…

(Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney in New York)

 

October 18th, 2007

Progressive Insurance Blunders Again

Some lawyers are dumb. I don’t know how else to put it. And this particular pratfall has to be the fault of an attorney.

Last month I wrote of Progressive Insurance spying on a church group — and taping private support group discussions where people were confidentially bearing their souls — in order to obtain information on a claimant that was a member of the group.

After the Atlanta Journal Constitution busted this tactic on its pages, the CEO of Progressive apologized for the appalling conduct and said:

“When I read that story I was appalled and, frankly, didn’t believe that it could possibly be accurate. I have since learned that the essential facts in the story are correct. What the investigators and Progressive people involved in that case did was wrong –period. I personally want to apologize to anyone who was affected by this incident.”

So what happens now? According to yet another story in the AJC yesterday, Progressive is now defending a violation of privacy lawsuit that arose out of the spying on the confessionals, and now says its spying was reasonable. But this isn’t because the defense lawyers are clueless and created the defense inadvertently. Progressive’s spokesperson, according to the article, has defended the defense. That means, to me, that the idea either came from, or is being defended by, the general counsel to the company.

So when the CEO said it was wrong. Period. I guess he didn’t really mean “period” as in we-have-no-excuse-or-justification-and-won’t-even-try. Because now the conduct is reasonable.

Some folks, it seems, know the fine art of taking a bad situation and making it worse.

(hat tips: The Consumerist and Shigley)

Addendum: Perlumtter & Schuelke weigh in with frivolous defenses driving up litigation costs.

(Eric Turkewitz is a personal injury attorney in New York)

Links to this post:

November 26 roundup
All-automotive edition: Court won’t unseal settlement arising from <05 million Aramark/Giants Stadium dramshop case for fear girl’s father will try to get his hands on money [NJLJ, NorthJersey.com, Childs; earlier] …

posted by @ November 26, 2007 12:02 AM

carnival of the capitalists #211
the editor of blawg review, who toils in anonymity with the help of tireless sherpa guides to the blogosphere, is proud to be hosting this week’s edition of the longest-running blog carnival, the carnival of the capitalists. …

posted by Editor @ October 22, 2007 12:01 AM

I’m sorry. No, I’m not.
New York Personal Injury Law Blog: Progressive Insurance Blunders Again: Some folks, it seems, know the fine art of taking a bad situation and making it worse.
posted by lilyhill @ October 18, 2007 12:00 AM