Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (193586)	7/8/2004 10:19:45 AM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573797

>Somewhat indirectly, the compensatory damage claimed was $175,000 but the lawyer asked for $1.5M. How do you justify that? Fortunately, the jury had a fair number of well educated individuals and awarded no punitive damages, only compensatory, no matter the theatrics of the sleazeball laywer (maybe sleazeball Edwards is better at this) >But let's look at this doctor's business. He is one of the best ones in his field and charges some 12K, and says openly to all his incoming patients that his success rate is about 97%. 3 out of 100 of these elective surgeries don't succeed. Although math is something I'm averse to, as a Democrat, I notice that you're missing a couple of items in your reasoning... First of all, how typical is the size of the award you're talking about (I don't know, I'm just asking)? Second, how many of those 3 failures sue? If it's 1/10th, that drops your numbers substantially. Then, out of that number, how many make it to a jury? And, out of that number, how many are awarded compensatory damages, and how many punitive? Potentially changes the math significantly, no? Of course, it might not change it at all, but I don't think that's the case. -Z

To: Joe NYC who wrote (193586)	7/8/2004 5:44:45 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1573797

<font color=brown>Dude, you never provided the most critical issue to this case: what did the MD do to the patient?<font color=black> So should businesses get away with the things they're being sued for? When the business loses a suit, that means it's done something wrong. You have compensatory damages and punitive damages. Compensatory damages compensate the injured party for damage done (and even these can be inflated). Punitive damages can be large multiple of compensatory damages, are completely unjustified, and are there to support the enormous industry of the trial lawyers ripping off the country. I was a juror - an alternate juror on one case. It wasn't clear to me if the doctor was at fault, since there were 2 doctors operating on the patient, and the second one (not the one being sued was in my opinion at fault). Somewhat indirectly, the compensatory damage claimed was $175,000 but the lawyer asked for $1.5M. How do you justify that? Fortunately, the jury had a fair number of well educated individuals and awarded no punitive damages, only compensatory, no matter the theatrics of the sleazeball laywer (maybe sleazeball Edwards is better at this) But let's look at this doctor's business. He is one of the best ones in his field and charges some 12K, and says openly to all his incoming patients that his success rate is about 97%. 3 out of 100 of these elective surgeries don't succeed. Let's do the math (something very much against the nature of a typical Democrat) and calculate the cost if each failure - and failures are inevitable - cost 1.5M 100 of these surgeries would cost 4.5M just in the payout of damages. We are talking 45,000 in litigation costs per surgery, or shutting down this doctors practices. The doctor's fee is 12,000, or maybe it used to be. If you add only the compensatory fees, they would inflate each surgery by $5,250. These trial lawyers are a very evil force in this country, an it takes a blind partisan to not recognize this.