To: jttmab who wrote (15303 ) 10/6/2002 11:57:05 AM From: ManyMoose Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284 Agreed. I wonder if he got fired. For a while the growth industry for lawyers was environmental lawsuits and appeals. Law schools would assign a timber sale Environmental document to appeal and the students would appeal. The Forest Service had to respond as if it were a legitimate appeal. It cost the taxpayers millions of dollars, and in the end the environmentalists destroyed forest management as a viable enterprise on public lands. The former chief of the Forest Service Jack Ward Thomas, who was the greenest Chief we'd had up to that point and was the choice of the environmentalists that Clinton put in office to pay them off, said the environmentalists were wandering about the battlefield bayoneting the wounded. Some of the wounded were already dead. Message #15303 from jttmab at Oct 6, 2002 2:50 AM You can't blame it on the lawyers I can blame the defense attorney for arguing in favor of the plaintiff. That's really stupid. Everybody hates lawyers until we need one. People are just getting too litigous I don't have any problem with lawyers. They represent their clients [except for this Phillip Morris lawyer <s>], which is what they are supposed to do. I recall reading that the suits/per capita in the early 1800s was higher than it is today. The politicians were saying the same things...frivolous suits, exhorbitant awards, etc. Congress considered torte reform, set up a committee, and did a fact finding trip to Europe. They were to examine civil litigation in Europe..caps on awards, fixed attorney fees [not percentages of awards]...same stuff you hear today. They came back, they reported and they decided to leave the system the way it was. The US system was the only one that allowed access to the common man. I've heard from an attorney that the real growth industry in litigation isn't people vs. people, or people vs. companies; the real growth industry is companies suing companies. jttmab