[HSF] Standard of care for lawyers

Michael Firstenberg msfirst at gmail.com
Wed Apr 9 23:01:06 EDT 2008 

although one can argue what comes around goes around.  the lawyers
that i have taken care of often are often the victums of vomitus
extremeus.  they often have the worst problems and comorbidities from
years of neglect or holier than thou attitudes... the more arrogent
the worse their problems.... they cant hide from their own medical
problems.

my mother is a lawyer who pays for malpractice insurance and is always
fretting over mistakes and cleaning up the mistakes - i.e. malpractice
- of others.  the stuff she sees that other lawyers have screwed up
will make your blood boil.

On 4/9/08, Donald Ross <donross at bigpond.com> wrote:
> Like tea said it is the commonest interpretation  of the golden rule.
> Lawyers make the rules so it is hardly surprising to see how
> thoroughly they look after themselves.
> In Australia you can't  sue a barrister.  It is against the law.
> All Ed can do is run for office, but that would entail joining those
> sewage dwelling creatures.
> Don
> On 10/04/2008, at 10:08 AM, DukeB60 at aol.com wrote:
>
> > Ed,
> >     My original plan was to get an opinion from the  Counsel for
> > Discipline
> > then bring an action against this lawyer for his  unbelievably
> > shoddy work.  If
> > you read my letter to the Court you would  have thought is was a
> > complete no
> > brainer decision but guess what.  I  wasn't totally surprised that
> > the Counsel
> > didn't rule against the lawyer but the  statements that is was
> > basically okay
> > to be negligent was shocking even to me so  it will probably be a
> > total waste
> > of time to try to sue his a**.  I hate  the whole idea anyway but
> > feel like I
> > got screwed.  And to think the  Supreme Court would use the term
> > "bungle" in
> > it's opinion is sadly  amusing.  When was the last time you heard
> > the term
> > "bungle" in a medical  malpractice action.  OMG.   I'm so upset
> > with the whole
> > situation  I could spit but will undoubtedly just chalk it up to
> > experience.  I
> > just  thought the Forum should know the incredibly low standard
> > that lawyers
> > are held  accountable to in their own profession.  I had no idea
> > and this
> > official  letter set the bar, so to speak, even lower than I
> > thought possible.
> >
> >
> >
> >                   Ed
> >
> > Edward P.  Raines, M.D., J.D.
> > BryanLGH Cardiothoracic Surgery
> > BryanLGH Medical Center  East
> > 1600 South 48th Str.
> > Lincoln, Nebraska 68506
> > Office:  402-481-8430
> > Cell: 402-730-9242
> > Fax: 402-481-8429
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 4/9/2008 5:49:32 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> > ebender001 at charter.net writes:
> >
> > Mike:
> > I was holding back.  I don't kid myself to think that  there are no
> > legal-type lurkers on this forum.  If there are any  listening in,
> > I've got a
> > hot tip on several cases of negligence and some  adverse drug
> > reactions that
> > have yet to be published.  I'm just  looking for a finders fee.
> > All kidding
> > aside, I would bet that in  every hospital in the country (USA),
> > there are
> > paid informants that report  back to litigators when they see an
> > adverse
> > outcome.  Sometimes it  might even be your colleague, your favorite
> > nurse or
> > respiratory therapist,  or even the custodial staff.  It is
> > surprising how
> > little "blood  money" it takes.
> >
> > Ed Bender, MD
> >
> >
> > On 4/9/08 5:34 PM, "Michael  Firstenberg" <msfirst at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Ed
> >> Tell us  how you really feel - dont hold back it is just us.
> >>
> >>
> >>  Michael Firstenberg <msfirst at gmail.com>
> >>
> >> -----Original  Message-----
> >> From: "Edward Bender"  <ebender001 at charter.net>
> >> To:  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
> >> Sent: 4/9/2008 5:48 PM
> >> Subject:  Re: [HSF] Standard of care for lawyers
> >>
> >> This is disturbing but  not that surprising.  Perhaps if lawyers were
> >> required to carry  malpractice insurance that paid as well as medical
> >> malpractice  insurance, there would be an incentive for one
> >> attorney to go
> >> after  another.  As it stands, what's in it for a prospective
> >> plaintiff?
> >>  Ethics are obviously not involved.
> >>
> >> I related your story to  one of my cardiologists with whom I
> >> regularly trade
> >> legal nightmare  stories.  He tells me of a surgeon who was in the
> >> middle of
> >> an  aortic aneurysm repair who was mistakenly paged by an outside
> >> ER for a
> >>  trauma case.  He wasn't on call and obviously could not deal with
> >> the
> > acute
> >> trauma during his AAA repair in any case.  The correct  surgeon
> >> was called,
> >> the patient was transferred but died in the ER of  severe multiple
> >> trauma.
> >> The mistakenly called surgeon was named in the  subsequent law
> >> suit, and the
> >> plaintiff's attorney refused to drop him  from the case unless he
> >> was paid
> >> some money.  This went on for  years, and he was eventually
> >> dropped.  The
> >> surgeon wanted to sue  the attorney but could find no attorney
> >> that was
> >> willing to take the  case.  The surgeon was so angered by this
> >> that he spent
> >> the next  year learning how to file and pursue this himself, and he
> >> eventually  won a huge settlement from the litigator's law firm.
> >> The moral
> >>  of the story is that litigators are scum sucking, bottom
> >> dwelling,  garbage
> >> eating pig-f**kers, who have crawled out of the a**hole of  hell -
> >> and I
> > mean
> >> that with all due respect.
> >>
> >> Ed  Bender, MD
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/9/08 1:28 PM, "dukeb60 at aol.com"  <dukeb60 at aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> ?? It has been fairly  quiet on the forum so I'll post this
> >>> recent response
> >>> from our  State Supreme Court to induce some reaction.? As you
> >>> know, I am a
> >>>  lawyer although I have never practiced law but do have a little
> >>> more
> >>> background than the average person and did pass the bar.? I
> >>> recently had a
> >>> lawyer handle a case for me in which he performed  very poorly
> >>> and what I
> >>> considered to be in a frankly negligent  manner by not
> >>> representing my
> >>> interests and failing to even read  some rather pertinent legal
> > materials.? As
> >>> a result, I filed a  complaint with the Counsel for Discipline of
> >>> our State
> >>> Supreme  court to review his handling of the case.? The response
> >>> startled
> > even
> >>> me not so much in the conclusion but the rational for the  same,
> >>> which I
> > will
> >>> share.? The respondent wrote,
> >>>
> >>> "Isolated instances of ordinary negligence or errors of
> >>> judgement  do not
> > rise
> >>> to the level of a disciplinary violation and are not  sufficient
> >>> to warrant
> >>> disciplinary action.?
> >>>  ?
> >>> ??As stated in Modern?Legal Ethics (1986):
> >>> ???
> >>> ????????? To date, the enforcement of competence standards has  been
> > generally
> >>> limited to relatively exotic, blatant, or repeated  cases of lawyer
> > bungling.?
> >>> Lawyers who make some showing of  effort, and who do nothing
> >>> other than
> >>> perform
> >>> badly,  rarely appear in the appellate reports in discipline
> >>> cases.? The
> >>>  lawyers who are disciplined for? incompetence have usually
> >>> aggravated
> > their
> >>> situation.? For example, several cases involve lawyers who,
> >>> after their
> >>> incompetent work, concocted elaborate schemes or lies  to decieve
> >>> a client
> >>> whose case was mishandled.
> >>>
> >>> ?? ... For the above reasons I have concluded, pursuant to Rule  of
> > Discipline
> >>> 9(C), that your allegations against Attorney "X" do  not warrant
> >>> further
> >>> inquiry by this office."?
> >>>
> >>> ???? So, this is the standard to which our legal professionals
> >>> are held in
> >>> their handling of cases.? I am quite certain it is not  the same
> >>> standard
> > to
> >>> which we, as medical professionals, are held  in the handling of our
> > cases.?
> >>> It
> >>> is okay to bungle as  long as you don't concoct a scheme to
> >>> conceal the
> >>>  bungling.
> >>> ?
> >>> As much as it is hard to believe that is  actually what a
> >>> representative of
> >>> the
> >>> Supreme Court  wrote it is true.? Caveat emptor, clearly, is the
> >>> rule in
> > law.?
> >>>  While I appreciate the education of a law degree, it is indeed
> > embarrassing
> >>> sometimes to be one.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> > ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
> > ???????>
> >>
> > ?
> >>>  ????????????????????????????????????????? Ed
> >>>  _______________________________________________
> >>> OpenHeart-L  mailing list
> >>>
> >>> Send postings to:
> >>>   OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
> >>>
> >>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to  CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
> >>>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
> >>>
> >>> All  messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
> >>> policies
> > and
> >>> disclaimers posted at:
> >>>  http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
> >>>  -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>  _______________________________________________
> >> OpenHeart-L mailing  list
> >>
> >> Send postings to:
> >>   OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
> >>
> >> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email  address, or to view archives:
> >>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
> >>
> >> All messages  transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
> >> policies and
> >>  disclaimers posted at:
> >> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
> >>  -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >>  _______________________________________________
> >> OpenHeart-L mailing  list
> >>
> >> Send postings to:
> >>   OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
> >>
> >> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email  address, or to view archives:
> >>  http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
> >>
> >> All messages  transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
> >> policies and
> >>  disclaimers posted at:
> >> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
> >>  -----------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenHeart-L  mailing list
> >
> > Send postings  to:
> > OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
> >
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email  address, or to view  archives:
> > http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
> >
> > All  messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
> > policies and
> > disclaimers posted  at:
> > http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
> > -----------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > **************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel
> > Guides.
> >   (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?
> > ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenHeart-L mailing list
> >
> > Send postings to:
> >  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
> >
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
> > http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
> >
> > All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the
> > policies and
> > disclaimers posted at:
> > http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
> > -----------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenHeart-L mailing list
>
> Send postings to:
>  OpenHeart-L at lists.hsforum.com
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, to CHANGE email address, or to view archives:
> http://mmp.cjp.com/mailman/listinfo/openheart-l
>
> All messages transmitted by the OpenHeart-L are subject to the policies and
> disclaimers posted at:
> http://www.hsforum.com/listdisclaim
> -----------------------------------------
>

More information about the OpenHeart-L mailing list