Poetic Justice Dept
You know those ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyers who make pretty much everything in America, but most especially medical care, cost obscenely more than it ought to cost? You know, the kind of parasites on the productive labor of others such as John "Two Americas" Edwards, or, say, Fetterman & Associates?
Ever so often the bastards get what's comin' to 'em.
What I think is unintentionally funny is the way Turley ends up his post:
In defense of the firm, however, I fail to see how the firm is responsible for a defectively manufactured chair unless there was some warning or overt weakness. Perhaps such evidence was introduced. Otherwise, it is a bit of a harsh burden for offices to be responsible for latent defects in chairs.But Jonathan, if the law firm actually had been negligent, and actually had deserved to pay three-quarters of a million dollars to somebody who fell out of a chair, then there would be nothing poetic about the justice. This is an entire industry that survives by inventing negligence when nothing of the sort exists, and by paying obscene amounts of money to (mostly Democratic) legislators to make sure that no meaningful tort reform ever puts a well-deserved end to their racket. Of course nobody should have to pay $750,000 to an idiot who can't even sit in a chair without falling out of it. Do you think that would stop Fetterman & Associates from demanding $750,000 -- or more, if they thought they could get it -- from the "negligent" business owner if it had happened in the office of, say, an MD rather than their own?
Now because these bastards are lawyers and would probably just as soon sue me (for slander, in this case) as look at me, it is important for me to state for the record that I know nothing specific about these particular ambulance-chasers other than (a) the fact that they were lobbying for the personal-injury business of these obviously lawsuit-happy clients at the time the
Would you support the tort reform that recognizes wrongful litigation as an obvious tort in itself, that allows juries in personal injury cases to return verdicts of "finding for the plaintiff" (meaning the defendant has to pay for what he did to the plaintiff), "finding for the defendant" (meaning nobody pays anybody because what happened was an unfortunate incident for which nobody should be punished), and "finding that the lawsuit was frivolous" (meaning that the plaintiff AND HIS LAWYER have wrongfully harmed the defendant by conspiring to inflict upon him the tort of pain and suffering through having to defend himself against said frivolous lawsuit, and that the jury can impose penalties upon both the plaintiff AND HIS LAWYER)?
Because if so -- if you at Fetterman & Associates are willing to be held financially responsible whenever you encourage a client to file a ridiculous personal claims lawsuit against an individual who obviously doesn't deserve to have to go through the pain and suffering of a lawsuit -- then I take back everything I've said here.
But if not -- why then you bastards just got exactly what you deserve, and poetic justice has been served.
Hmmmm, perhaps I should move this one over to the political blog -- I started out just thinking it was a hilarious story, but it turned into a bit of a rant. I'll post it for now but I might move it upon further reflection.