Originally Posted by
Hot 'n' High
.......
WR 6-3, again, my apologies and please rest assured my comment was very tongue-in-cheek hence my initial apology! That those who suffered from this tragic accident receive recompense as a very poor substitute to not still having their loved ones with them is absolutely essential! My comment was more along the lines that it looks like determining culpability will be quite convoluted...... hence the "lawyer" quip. If it came across as otherwise I, again, unreservedly apologise!
.......!
There was no need to apologize in the first instance, H 'n' H, as far as I was concerned - and in retrospect I should have said so. I mean, among other reasons, although I'm a guest on this forum it is not in the form of some sort of self-proclaimed representative or spokesman for lawyers in general or any of them.
In a contingency fee matter, it obviously is not certain that the lawyers will do well (that's the entire point of making the fee contingent on the outcome). But in this particular matter, both sides of the equation are fairly obvious - there is very high likelihood for a large damages award (or settlement) - the facts are too compelling. And therefore, the attorneys will do well too.
I guess the intended humour eluded my limited sense thereof, or just plain limited sense.
Cheers!
WR 6-3