Sick money grabing lawyers

[A and C]

I was allmost phisicly sick last night when veiwing a channel 4 program about aircrashes.

The part that made me realy ill was the lawyers that were trying to put a price on the suffering of people in the last seconds before they were killed in an aircrash.

The people who suffered this traumer cant be compensated for there suffering so the only motive for going down this path can be to up the lawyers percentage.

With the extra destress that bringing this up in court must bring to the loved ones of the victims I cant help wondering is there any thing that an American lawyer wont stoop to to make an extra buck or two.

These people make me ashamed to be part of the human race.

[Shuttleworth]

Absolutely.
Sick leaches who contribute nothing to society and get paid five times as much as doctors , teachers etc.

[Lu Zuckerman]

Have you ever asked yourself why a dog licks himself? It is because he can, and the same is true for lawyers. Not the licking part but the lawyer is allowed to establish the amount he / she is seeking by law. It is true that a lawyer may try to influence the judgement to up his fee for taking the case but then again if he loses he may have invested several hundred thousand dollars of his firms money with no return on the investment.

Regarding the lawyer placing a value on human life and suffering the FAA has already beaten him to it. The US Department of commerce performs an evaluation every year regarding the value of a human life. Many things go into the calculation including the gross national product, the cost of living as well as several other factors. Two years ago they came up with a figure of 2.5 Million dollars. The FAA uses this figure in calculating a cost benefit analysis to determine if a fix recommended by the NTSB is cost effective. This 2.5 Million dollars has no effect on the value of a human life in a court case. There have been awards of over a Billion dollars but in most cases the amount will be reevaluated by an appeals court where it will be knocked down to a more reasonable level.

Now I ask you this. If you were killed in an air crash would you want your family to seek the services of a lawyer or just consider lawyers as leaches and have your family members suffer in their own way?


:*

[Flying Lawyer]

Lu's last line hits the nail on the head.

Shuttleworth's response is too stupid to merit a reply.

A&C
I can understand your reaction, but think it through for a moment.
Suppose that personally, I think bereaved families should not be entitled to compensation/damages for that aspect, but professionally, I know the widow and children I'm representing are entitled to them.
What do you think I should do? Try to get the most I can for them, or not tell them?
Often, they've lost the main bread-winner for the family, but the cost of bringing up the children hasn't gone away.

I'm not saying I necessarily agree with damages for that aspect, but consider the alternative argument: People are entitled, in certain circumstances, to damages for trauma they have suffered. The damages you mention are not intended to compensate the deceased - he/she is dead and can't be compensated - but to compensate the bereaved families for the trauma they have suffered by going over and over what their loved ones must have been going through in those moments.
Haven't you experienced bereaved families saying things like 'When I think of what he must have been going through in the last moments ......' and then collapsing into floods of tears? That is trauma.
Or, in different circumstances, saying 'At least it was quick. I couldn't bear the thought of him knowing that he was about to die." ie They couldn't bear the trauma.
There are two sides to the argument.

Re the "extra distress that bringing this up in court must bring to the loved ones of the victims". That is their free choice. All I can say is I've never once in my entire career known a single client who has said they'd rather forego extra damages than have a particular aspect brought up.

I saw part of the programme. Most of the lawyers were specialists in this field, some are very well known for getting high awards for their clients. Ask yourself why their clients go to them?
Sometimes, holding a company/body to account is more important to the bereaved families than getting compensation, but those cases are a small minority in my experience. People usually either want, or need money and that's why they sue for damages.

[witchdoctor]

Personally I didn't find that as sickening as the alleged attitude of the aircraft manufacturers who choose to leave a known problem, which they know will lead to fatalities, because it is cheaper to pay out for dead passengers than rectifying the fault.

That is more than sick, and the people responsible belong in jail.

[keendog]

The only way to manufacture an aeroplane that you KNOW will not cause fatalaties is to plant its undercarriage in concrete.

[TDK mk2]

I tuned in just as the gentleman who lost his wife and two daughters in TWA800 was reading a discription of what they would have gone through during the break up of their aircraft. I found it unpleasant to watch, which is nothing in comparison to what he must have been feeling reading it.

What I'm wondering is who wrote it, for what purpose, and how did they proport to know so much detail about the last moments of these people? It was my understanding that such a catastophic failure of such an aircraft at that altitude and airspeed would render the occupants unconcious within moments of the start of it. I.E. the combination of low temperature, low air density, high airspeed and high g forces.

The way it was written would suggest that they remained concious throughout the initial explosion, subsequent violent pitch up of the wing, centre and rear fuselage, then separtion from the aircraft in their seats and their decent to the sea. I personally don't believe this would have been the case, and therefore that a great deal additional trauma was caused to that gentleman by the belief that it did.

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: witchdoctor

Personally I didn't find that as sickening as the alleged attitude of the aircraft manufacturers who choose to leave a known problem, which they know will lead to fatalities, because it is cheaper to pay out for dead passengers than rectifying the fault.

The manufactures making a fix to correct a problem is secondary in the equation.

In my post above I alluded to the FAA performing a cost benefit analysis. Here is how it works.

Using TWA 800 as an example (my numbers may not be accurate) lets say that there were 200 passengers and ten crew for a total of 210 souls. The FAA will multiply 210 by the value of a human life ($2,500,000) arriving at a total of $525,000,000.

They will then calculate the cost of incorporating the fix (inerting system) to all of the 747 fleet, the revenue loss to all of the operators while incorporating the fix and the impact on the economy. If the cost of including the fix is more than the value of the lost souls then they will recommend against the NTSBs recommendation of including an inerting system.

The only thing the manufacturer can do and it is not required is to include the inerting system on new build 747s raising the cost accordingly.

[Faire d'income]

There is as usual some merit in both sides of the argument but every wants to rush to the extremes. I guess that is the world we now live in. Personally I think there should be awards but not so high. Litigation after fatalities hardly comforts the bereaved and it just drives up costs drastically for the rest of the world.

Providing for dependants is a must but compensation for the trauma suffered, I don't think so. What about the trauma suffered by close friends, team mates, partners at work? Nobody would agree to have these compensated yet they can suffer real trauma after a loss also. Common sense should be the way to go but not in todays world unfortunately. :confused:

[B767300ER]

TWA 800 had 210 passengers onboard

Lu, actually 800 had 230 souls onboard including 16 operating crew and 16 more dead-heading to CDG.

Another new, disgusting trend after air disasters is for false claims to be made against wealthy men who perished. Usually, in Mexico or Central America, news of the crash is heard, then a manifest is printed. Con-men pick a man with a good job and falsely claim he fathered children out of wedlock in Mexico or Guatemala or Panama, and sue for compensation. Most have been exposed as fraudulent, but many have collected funds, and seriously hurt families in the process, who question fidelity or commitment of husbands who were faithful. A really nasty, awful scam indeed. http://www.starmanauctions.com/twa.gif

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: B767300ER

I stated that my numbers were in error. I selected the number 210 as an example in order to run the equation.

Regarding the filing of false claims you have to consider where the initial claim was filed and the ethics of the lawyer making the claim. If an American lawyer assisted in the prosecution of the case in the USA you have to consider the professional character of the American lawyer. There are many American lawyers that are "ambulance chasers" and will resort to any means to generate a fee.

I belong to an organization of over 300 lawyers that specialize in aviation law and I doubt seriously if any of them would get involved in the type of cases you described and no, I am not a lawyer.

:cool:

[B767300ER]

Do you play a lawyer on TV, Lu?:D

[jeppsbore]

From personal involvement I know it's not the lawyers at fault here.
I was recently involved with an incident that is on another thead. The thing that shocked me was that during a meeting with the solicitor for the insurers of the aircraft there was a scale of how much an individual was worth. One ocupant of the aircraft was a mid 20's male with a pregnant girlfriend, another was a teenager with a future as an instuctor and maybe ATPL etc, as we discussed the case the insruance guy put a price on what he considered they were "worth" in earning potential for the near future so that he knew the limitations of what his companies risk was.
It was decided long before the case went to court how much would be paid out, so again please don't blame the lawyers, they are just doing the best they can for their client to the best of their ability.
The truth is, the insurance compaies have already agreed a price for a life

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: B767300ER

The last time I played on TV the Bartender made me get off saying I was scratching the finish.

:E :ooh:

[BlueEagle]

TDKmk2 - I believe I am correct in saying that TWA800 was a low-level break up, around 13 to 14,000 feet so the aircraft would have only been partially pressurised. The initial explosion may well have rendered some of the passengers unconscious or dead but the majority would probably have stayed conscious throughout. There would not have been a noticeable lack of oxygen, certainly not sufficent to bring about unconsciousness in a reasonably healthy person, anyway.

[Rollingthunder]

UAL's Bankruptcy Lawyers Document a Feast of Fees
Chicago Tribune

A word of advice for the mechanics, pilots, flight attendants and ticket personnel at United Airlines: In your next lives, go to law school.

Big-time bankruptcies can be a head-turning feast of fees for lawyers,and early indications point to Chicago's
Kirkland & Ellis as not only following the white-collar tradition but
upping the ante.

As workers for the bankrupt giant UAL continue to face sharp reductions in pay and outright fear of losing their jobs,
the company's outside law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, is actually enjoying a pay hike amid the collective misery and
corporate drama.

For three weeks in December, the firm asked a federal bankruptcy judge in Chicago for $2.3 million in fees for its
efforts on behalf of UAL Corp. Now, the claims of its January handiwork are in, with a total request of $2.9 million in
fees and expenses for the month of January.

But the more than 700 pages of documents for its January labors, filed last week, include a footnote reminding the
judge that the Loop firm's original deal with United "anticipates that the regular hourly rates for some professionals
and paraprofessionals working on these Chapter 11 [bankruptcy] cases may increase on January 1, 2003."

Well, they did.

For example, partner James H.M. Sprayregen had been charging United a princely $680 an hour until Jan. 1. But the 125 hours he says he worked during January on the case came at a rate of $730 an hour, for a total of $91,250.

It's the same, too, for partners George B. Javaras (hiked to $685 an hour from $665), Lyndon Norley (up to $655 from $625) and William R. Welke (now $685, previously $665).

In all, Kirkland & Ellis indicates the firm spent nearly 9,000 hours
working on the case during January.

An apparently dogged army was led, when it comes to time devoted, by partner Jeffrey Gettleman. He topped all
attorneys by billing for 316 hours of work at a seemingly
bargain-basement rate of $225 an hour, while battalions of
paraprofessionals were led by legal assistant Gary M. Vogt, who put in for 273 hours at $210 an hour.

At the other hand of the spectrum, one finds UAL being billed for .30 of an hour, or 18 minutes, put in by paraprofessional Charlotte Westhoff. Given her $110 an hour rate, that amounts to $33. Similarly, when it came to technology service employee Michael Rocco, the firm indicates he worked .20 of an hour on a matter, which means charging UAL $39, given his $195-an-hour rate.

The latest fee petition is nothing if not detailed, with the image
inescapably left of some Winter Olympics timekeeper
hovering over every breath expended in the UAL matter by any firm employee.

For example, there's the explication of 3.7 hours spent on Jan. 2 byattorney James J. Mazza, who bills out at $305 an
hour:

"Research automatic stay issues re pending discrimination actions (1.3);
prepare for and attend telephone conference with P. Lilly re Galileo motion for relief from stay (.4);
prepare for and attend telephone conference with J. Miller re responses to motions for relief (.3);
respond to e-mail and voice mail inquiries from company legal
department re stay issues (.6);
telephone conference with C. Saracino, outside insurance counsel, re stay of workers' compensation actions (.4);
prepare for and attend office conference with J. Horwitz re litigation issues re stay (.3);
telephone conference with M. Wexley re litigation strategy in light of stay issues (.4)."

There is also the .20 of an hour, or 12 minutes, spent on Jan. 8 by
attorney Erik Chalut, whose time is charged as out at $345 an hour: "Draft e-mail to Australian counsel re enforcement of automatic stay in Australia."

The Jan. 16 labor of legal assistant Andrew Groesch, whose time is valued at $190 an hour, included .10 of an hour,
or six minutes, billed UAL to "search and distribute stay precedent to J. Mazza," the Kirkland attorney.

Then there was the Jan. 21 work of attorney Andre Davis ($345 an hour), for which the firm is charging the client .10
of an hour, or six minutes, to "leave telephonic message for D. Anderson re payment of prepetition amounts and
application of stay."

There are many expected expenses, especially for photocopying reams of papers, and many charges for limo services for employees. And there are phone expenses, some indicating
that regardless of how much or how little business might have been transacted during the call, the client is asked to foot the bill.

Those include a 59-cent phone call to Glencoe and a 62-cent call to Indianapolis, among others.

All prices in US $.

With apologies to our PPRuNe legal types.

[Stosser]

Dear Flying Lawyer

You dismiss Shuttleworths post as being stupid becuase he said...

Sick leaches who contribute nothing to society

I find his post intemperate at the very least, but he or she raises an interesting point in generalizing rather particularizing the argument.

Can you justify the value of lawyers to society as a whole, since you appear to be arguing 'greatest good for a client' rather than the 'greatest good for society'.

I have never heard a lawyer try to argue this case and wonder why not.

[The Nr Fairy]

I've just finished reading a book called "Nine minutes Twenty seconds", about the crash of ASA529 in 1995.

One of the final chapters is titled "The Value of a Human Life", and deals dispassionately with the reasoning behind the actions.

Well worth a read, in this instance for that particular chapter. If you read the rest of the book, I bet you get a lump in your throat at least three or four times.

[Unwell_Raptor]

Stosser:

Try considering your question, only substituting Doctor for Lawyer.

'Society' would be much better off if we stopped wasting money on treating non-productive people, such as the very young and the very old. Do you think that is a good idea?

This is nothing to do with society, it is to do with justice.

To misquote a wise old judge, justice is like an elephant. Few of us could define it, but we know it when we see it.

[bugg smasher]

I also disagree with the practices of some lawyers whose professional orientation leans towards extracting maximum dollar for personal gain, we have enough examples of it here in N America. When the crash crews and morgues are done, however, someone has to clean up the ensuing mess, disentangle the raw emotions from the hard facts.

Lawyers are the means by which our societies accomplish that. As distasteful as it might seem to some, the lawyer has a right to be compensated in a manner that reflects his education, training and experience.

My question would be, when an honest man is asked by his firm to defend a position he knows is wrong, what are his choices?

[Lu Zuckerman]

The fact that a lawyer generates enormous fees for his involvement in a case does no mean that the lawyer gets paid at that rate per hour of involvement. A legal firm is compensated much like an airframe manufacturer. When an Airframe manufacturer establishes the ultimate cost of a new airframe they calculate the man-hours necessary to develop the design and then they determine how many Doctorate holders are involved all the way down to the number of technicians to drive the rivets. They then determine a fixed value for each individual involved in producing the airframe and they add in their overhead, their burden necessary to cover their operating expenses, any other fixed or variable costs and then they add in the profit. A Ph.D. may be billed to the customer at $250.00 per hour but he will be lucky if he gets $75.00 per hour. This same formula goes all the way to the lowest individual on the food chain.

But then again the lawyers referenced in the above post relative to the UAL bankruptcy case can be likened to a dog that licks himself. They do it because they can.

In most cases people like those on this forum are appalled when they see the numbers because their only frame of reference is how much they make per week.

:rolleyes: