Our Legal System ? ((((( Ot))))

[Kip Powick]

A man who killed his wife should be allowed to collect on her life insurance policy because he was insane at the time, Ontario’s top court ruled Tuesday........................

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/insane-killer-entitled-to-victims-life-insurance-ontario-court-rules/article2412506/

[Moon The Loon]

And on the other side of the coin:

http://www.ottawacit...2206/story.html

Why does it take someone like this so long to get disbarred? This person has 5 "convictions" by the Law Society:

"Guilty of professional misconduct 5 times in 7 years, Ottawa lawyer faces more allegations."

By Lee Greenberg, The Ottawa Citizen April 24, 2012

Read more: http://www.ottawacit...l#ixzz1t2WLXVWo

[st27]

"In the latest charges, Landry also claims she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)."

With all due respect to individuals who have been in horrific situations [active military,veterans,law enforcement etc], this condition is becoming a bit of a joke...it seems to be so broadly applied I could be diagnosed from being involved a multi cart accident in aisle 9 at Walmart.

[DEFCON]

"Why does it take someone like this so long to get disbarred?"

From this and many other examples it should be pretty clear to all; 'ethics' aren't really all that important to the 'profession'? I should add; ethics appears to be a concept lost on modern society in general, regardless of where one looks.

[UpperDeck]

"Why does it take someone like this so long to get disbarred?"

'ethics' aren't really all that important to the 'profession'?

That's an inane remark and diminishes you.

Do you know of any pilots who have engaged in conduct which you knew reflected upon their ability to operate an aircraft? Did you ensure they lost their APL? Does that establish that you're unethical?

Do you know of any pilots who were deemed unacceptable at one airline and yet hired at another? Should all pilots be up in arms over this inconsistency?

It's a mug's game pointing the finger at an entire profession because 1% may be of questionable character.

[Seeker]

It's a mug's game pointing the finger at an entire profession because 1% may be of questionable character.

Doesn't the joke go something like; Isn't a shame about 99% of the lawyers giving the rest a bad name?

[DEFCON]

“That's an inane remark and diminishes you.”

But who or where is the guardian of ethics & standards that should be permanently removing the unethical lawyer from the pool? The gal in this case presents as an excellent example of a ‘system that just continues along, leaving her free to screw over the unsuspecting client year after year?

“Do you know of any pilots who have engaged in conduct which you knew reflected upon their ability to operate an aircraft? Did you ensure they lost their APL? Does that establish that you're unethical?”

Yes, no, and because pilots are so closely ‘regulated’, their regulating body will move quickly to permanently remove an ‘offensive & unethical pilot from the gene pool. As an aside; how many lawyers have been singled out at the Court House security check-points for having alcohol on their breath prior to attending before the Court? I think I’d prefer my lawyer wasn’t drinking before representing me, but hey, I guess the body governing lawyers doesn’t consider impairment a concern?

“Do you know of any pilots who were deemed unacceptable at one airline and yet hired at another? Should all pilots be up in arms over this inconsistency?”

Yes I do, but more often than not, any ‘inconsistency’ in this regard has little to do with ethical behaviour and is more a matter of personalities, hiring quotas & politics. In fairness, the situation you’ve identified exists throughout society’s many industries?

“It's a mug's game pointing the finger at an entire profession because 1% may be of questionable character”

That’s not what I was doing; my finger was pointed directly at the body, the regulator of the profession. To close; I believe there are many competent & ethical lawyers out there and although he’s something of a different ‘type’, I know one personally that carries the ‘bar’ very high.

[UpperDeck]

Defcon..

You mean the one you know is within the 1% that Seeker references?

I'm not going to tell you that I'm enamoured of our Law Society and its governing Benchers. I don't like many of the recent changes and I CERTAINLY don't like the procedural amendments.

However, I do know this to be true. The vast majority of lawyers with whom most of the public come into contact are honest, hardworking and contributing members of their community struggling like everyone else to make a decent living.

When many think of "lawyers", they don't think of their neighbour or the guy at the club; "Oh, that's just Greg."

They think of the fellow on Bay Street in Toronto occupying a corner office on the 36th floor charging hourly what "Greg" would be happy to net in a week.

And guess what? Those guys (and ladies) in corner offices are as rare as NHL players when compared to all of the pick-up players and Wednesday evening leagues at the local arena.

And then---narrow it further. How many of those who made it to the NHL are elite?

And there we are---the creme de la creme.

And to be honest? Are they REALLY that good? Damned if I know.

And somewhere in that analogy rests the crooks in the lawyering profession--both those who have been identified and those who await their turn. Maybe 1%? That would be quite a few with today's numbers in the profession but if I was told it was closer to 2%, I wouldn't be shocked.

Regardless---the overwhelming majority are nice people doing the best they can with what they have looking forward to getting home for dinner with their family.

They don't need---they don't deserve---to be the target of the cynicism of strangers.

[boestar]

The ones that give Lawyers a bad name are the ambulance chasers and the guys on TV "Dave "the Hammer" Shapiro will get you cash because you were and idiot and want to blame someone else" Those guys should be outlawed. The lawyers that will take any dumbass case on for the sake of making someone money are the bad ones. Cases with no real legal merit should be deemed as such and left alone.

Anyone who has to drink luke warm coffee at McDonalds will know what I am talking about. It is all because someone sued Mickey D's because they spilled hot coffe in their lab while driving. AND WON.

[cp fa]

Boestar, you should watch a documentary film called Hot Coffee. That lawsuit against Macdonalds was successful for a reason, and the public was sold a bill of goods about it.

The film is a real eye opener about big business, political agendas, and media manipulation.

[J.O.]

I thought that the decision against McDonalds was overturned on appeal.

[Kip Powick]

.................. McDonalds.........................

Lots about the coffee incident on the web but this caught my eye.........

http://www.hurt911.org/mcdonalds.html

[cp fa]

I thought that the decision against McDonalds was overturned on appeal.

Urban myth. In fact, she was not driving, the car was not in motion, her burns were serious enough to merit an 8 day hospital stay, during which she received numerous skin grafts, followed by 2 years of medical treatment.. In the course of the trial, it became clear that Macdonalds was aware that their coffee was capable of causing such severe injuries because they had quietly paid off over 700 similar claims in the 10 years prior to this suit. The punitive damages were so high in this case because the jury was rightfully outraged that a company would continue a practice for so long, knowing that it was harmful, in this case, knowingly serving coffee at a temperature that would instantly cause severe burns if it came into contact with skin. The case was not overturned, but the trial judge did reduce the amount of punitive damages. Both parties appealed, and eventually settled for an undisclosed sum.

The woman at the heart of the controversy became the object of ridicule and scorn, and the facts of her case twisted and manipulated a used as a symbol by a group with an agenda.

http://en.wikipedia....9;s_Restaurants

http://www.hotcoffee...com/Default.asp

[UpperDeck]

This case is probably the most oft-cited by those seeking to establish that the system has "gone mad".

I can't tell you the number of times I've told people the actual facts generating a very surprised response.

One additional fact not mentioned in the story; as I recall, there was evidence that the styrofoam containers lose some of their "strength" at high temperture and this was known to this particular franchise.

Boestar---that reference aside, let me say that I personally HATE legal services advertising. I know of VERY few successful and well-regarded lawyers who use mass media to market their services.

Ambulance chasers? Again---the phrase is familiar but I'm not terribly sure what it really means in today's world in Ontario. The phrase is pejorative but not accurately descriptive given our "no-fault" regime and injury threshold which must be exceeded before one can pursue any claim for damages.

And---as an aside---you might be surprised to learn what percentage of PI (personal injury) cases are initiated and pursued successfully against insurers who wrongfully withhold the statutory benefits to which injured motorists and/or passengers are entitled.

What a shock, right? But ask yourself----without skilled and able representation, how would those "insurance consumers" (mandatory, remember) manage to hold the companies to account?

Legal services are "consumed" and just like any and all other service providers, if his or her services aren't "consumed", that particular lawyer is out of business. The marketplace is often the best method of exercising quality control.

[J.O.]

Someone at McDonalds needed to read up on the Ford Pinto case before the coffee issue ever went to trial.

[chockalicious]

Someone at McDonalds needed to read up on the Ford Pinto case before the coffee issue ever went to trial.

I don't feel like googling it (surely some of our less busy memebrs wil link to it ) but didn't Ford know the Pinto could be a death trap but chose to go the route that it was cheaper to pay all the lawsuits than re-engineer the car?

On the topic of lawyers, ethics and such, like anything else there are good and bad lawyers and I don't think that the "ambulance chaser" stereotype is completely undeserved. That being said I think UD is accurate in his portrayal of those in the legal profession.

[Kip Powick]

I don't feel like googling it (surely some of our less busy memebrs wil link to it ) but didn't Ford know the Pinto could be a death trap but chose to go the route that it was cheaper to pay all the lawsuits than re-engineer the car?

...............................................

Sorry to hear you are so busy..... but I do understand...what with loose ends to tie up on Friday ...........hopefully your weekend has some free time for you :biggrin2:

Yes, Ford knew........interesting reading here..there are TWO pages

http://www.motherjon...9/pinto-madness

[chockalicious]

Thanks Kip!

[boestar]

UD:

WRT "No Fault" This is a misnomer in Ontario at least. in the event of an accident Fault IS assigned to one driver and is a matter of record. Insurance companies do look at this when assessing the claim. No fault is a feel good statement that really has no practical value.

While I do understand that the coffee was hot and all of that spin that is put on by both parties I still believe that the onus was on the person that ordered the coffee. Coffee will never be any hotter than 212 Deg F (100 Deg C). placing anything like that between your legs no matter what cup it is in is asking for trouble. If it was a miklkshake would she sue for frostbite? No matter what spin is put on the case COFEE IS HOT be careful. Canada is not nearly as bd as the US in the frivilous lawsuit area and seeing all those advertisments drives me crazy because these guys are advertizing fraud and theft whether that is their intention or not. False injury claims are at an all time high in the US and that is exactly why, because lawyers want a piece of the action.

That may be pigeon holing a minority even a small minority but that is what gets the attention not the small town everyday lawyer with scruples.

[J.O.]

So, let's suppose that instead of the scenario given, that instead she was burned when the coffee cup slipped out of her hand when the car went over a bump in the road. Since McDonalds was selling coffee through the drive through, it can easily be argued that they were doing so to allow someone to drink the coffee while in the car - in other words, using their product "as intended". If you are injured while using something "as intended", case precedent puts the liability for injuries on the product's provider for not making it safe to do so. As they were aware of hundreds of prior cases, it's impossible to argue that they couldn't possibly know their product was a hazard.

[chockalicious]

UD:

WRT "No Fault" This is a misnomer in Ontario at least. in the event of an accident Fault IS assigned to one driver and is a matter of record. Insurance companies do look at this when assessing the claim. No fault is a feel good statement that really has no practical value.

While I do understand that the coffee was hot and all of that spin that is put on by both parties I still believe that the onus was on the person that ordered the coffee. Coffee will never be any hotter than 212 Deg F (100 Deg C). placing anything like that between your legs no matter what cup it is in is asking for trouble. If it was a miklkshake would she sue for frostbite? No matter what spin is put on the case COFEE IS HOT be careful. Canada is not nearly as bd as the US in the frivilous lawsuit area and seeing all those advertisments drives me crazy because these guys are advertizing fraud and theft whether that is their intention or not. False injury claims are at an all time high in the US and that is exactly why, because lawyers want a piece of the action.

That may be pigeon holing a minority even a small minority but that is what gets the attention not the small town everyday lawyer with scruples.

Couple things Boestar, did you read any of the links on the McDonalds case that were posted? The coffee was too damn hot. It is one thing to expect that "youch that is hot" if a person spills it vs 3rd degree burns that require surgery if a person spills it.

Do you have anything to support your assertion that "False injury claims are at an all time high in the US" and that the advertising is the cause of this? While I find the ads more ridiculous than anything else (I love the Jim the HAMMER! Shapiro ads) what is the alternative? This is the system that is set up, not sure there is a better alternative.

[boestar]

What is "too damn hot" when I have my coffee the water is precicely 100 Degrees when poured into the cup. that is a full 40 degrees higher than the article quoted as causing 3rd degree burns in 1 second. I know there will be some cooling of the coffee after being poured but I am an educated guy and I learned at a very early age to respect the things that can hurt you. I can complain about alot of things at various companies some that have caused me "harm" but being an educated guy I know that I am responsible for my actions. If I do something stupid and hurt myself then bad on me.

If the person at McDonalds had spilled the hot coffee on the lady then Ican see an issue but putting something hot in your lap and expecting a good out come is a litte naive. She should be responsible for her actions. She made the error in judgement.

As for the false injury claims I do not have a direct reference but it is one of the claims of the insurance industry as a cause for rising rates.

[chockalicious]

Fair enough, judge and jury disagrees with you (as do I).

[Peter Gill]

Perhaps all cotton growers and manufacturers of cotton garments should bear responsibility since the fabric and clothing design held in the hot liquid. Or maybe designers and manufacturers of car seats since they didn't produce a seat which would allow the liquid to drain away if you're STUPID ENOUGH TO DUMP THE WHOLE FRICKING CUP IN YOUR LAP. Or maybe there should be a qualification test to see if you can really open a coffee cup lid safely and if you can't, so sorry but you're banned from ordering hot liquids at drive-thrus.

[J.O.]

Take a pill. No other place sold coffee that was nearly as hot, and they knew it was a problem. If it wasn't, why did the finally fix it after they lost the law suit?