Yeah that is v stupid but yeah I meant I’ve never even been asked to have a client do one sounds like a huge waste of time
Oh wow the doctor paid by the insurance company or defense firm said my guy wasn’t as hurt as bad as his own docs I wonder why that is or wow the doc paid by the def firm or insurance company agreed he is fucked up What am I missing
Basically gives us a preview of what our expert will say at trial about why all plaintiffs aren't injured Or in the second case, it lets us know to get the hell out of Dodge. They're not particularly useful, but claims adjustors LOVE ordering them.
Don't have the volume of cases that Gallant Knight does, but I've never seen one requested (Alabama).
We have a lot of carriers who ask us to do them, and I discourage it unless it's either a novel medical issue or major damages.
just got an email from a lawyer with allstate who i had a depo with on wednesday evening. she lists herself as a 'senior trial attorney' in her sig block she was licensed 11/2017
i'm generally pretty stunned at how often people i know work from home. i would get nothing accomplished, and i'm pretty sure a lot of them dont do shit other than answer emails and watch tv. i wont even allow anyone who works from me to work from home. but we are also pretty much only working from 830-530 and maybe 1 halfday saturday a quarter
CME/DMEs are extremely effective in conservative jurisdictions. You can cross examine these guys all day with evidence of how much work they've done for the defense firm or for insurance companies. Doesn't matter. When that white haired bastard that has practiced medicine for 30-40 years tells the jury that your client suffered soft tissue injuries that should've resolved within 6 weeks of the MVA, the jury buys it. Or at least they believe him more than your scumbag malingering money grabbing jackpot justice wanting plaintiff.
I almost never request CMEs in med mal defense cases. Have one I scheduled the other day but only because the plaintiff did a plaintiff IME to support a brain injury claim and I didn’t want my neuro expert to be ata disadvantage for not having examined the plaintiff himself too.
Yeah, I can see a place for it, but it’d have to be something pretty extraordinary for me not to be annoyed. I try to be easy to deal with, but stuff like that starts to increase the price to exit.
Update - got it settled. Lawyer tried to chisel me over 25k but ultimately paid what we had essentially agreed upon at mediation. Fucking dumb.
my legal assistant was just in a wreck. she moved here from florida about 18 months ago and i guess just kept renewing her florida policy and never notified them that she moved to texas. are they going to deny the claim even though she had been paying her premium? we ordered a copy of her policy but state farm says it will take a few weeks to get to her.
Managing partner asked me to draft a motion for him. Pulled up one he drafted for an old case to use as a template because he is very particular about how things are written. Change the facts to match the current case and give it to him. Got it back last night and he re-wrote the entire thing with a note about how shitty it was and how there wasn't enough case law to back it up.
This is my every day existence. No matter how accurately I copy his prior writings, nothing I do is right.
I have a meeting with my boss tomorrow and depending on how the meeting goes I might be looking for a new position. Not thrilled about job hunting again, especially considering I want to stay in-house and based on other aspects of my life, my location isn't exactly a booming in-house market.
yep. It is amazing how I will modify my structure or verbiage to match past writings. And it never fails that they get red-lined. Motherfucker, this was your idea!
he also has the worst handwriting and uses a thick as hell ink pen so corrections that should take 15 minutes take 90+ min
This is hitting a little close to home. My boss has no concept of personal space and will literally stand inches away from me and stare over my shoulder as he dictates corrections at an agonizingly slow pace.
My company has a legal service I will ultimately use if needed, but just thought it’d check in here. landlord called yesterday to say that they’re considering selling the house I am renting when my lease ends on April 30. First time he’d ever brought this up, and all conversations prior to this implied the house would still be rented. We signed the 2 year lease with the understanding that we would occupy the house through the 3 years we lived in this city. The lease says it runs through April 30 then is month to month after that. ive looked through my city ordinances (Lacey, WA) and it doesn’t look like I have any leverage to avoid having to move. So far I think my only recourse is a sizable rent increase in order for my landlord to “meet his financial goals” for the remaining 17 months from lease end to when we will move. Anyone have advice/input?
I'm in the middle of a 3 week trial I've been dragged into. Suffice to say, this shit sucks. Billing 10-12 hours/day for 3 straight weeks is nice, but nowhere near worth the time commitment.
Back at office at moment, waiting on a verdict. not awful facts: Defendant goes to meet victim to pay him $1k Def says he only has 200 Victim reaches in car and punches Def several times. Def drives off 5-10 feet. Def stops because he can't see and then gets out of car *Def says victim charged at him again *Victim says def charged at him Def shoots victim. Vic survives. Attempt Homicide. Jury has been out since 3:12, now 5:27.
guilty of lesser included “attempted manslaughter” which I’ve always found to be a funny charge. 3rd degree felony, firearm enhances it to a 2nd. I’m thinking 10 years.
That’s a convoluted mess. Prefer the general view of manslaughter as reckless/heat of passion, which you of course cannot intend. Make a lot more sense to just try that as an Asaault 1 I would’ve thought.
In retrospect I should have done a three but the landlord used a property management company to find a renter whose “standard lease**” is two years and the landlord said it was no problem to extend for the third year. Like two months ago my landlord called and said his “market research guy” was gonna get back to him soon and he’d let me know about a new lease/rent. Lesson learned I suppose. I’m used to dealing with professional lessors and this is just a regular guy with a second house. **I found out today by talking to that lawyer that said standard lease is legally a one year lease and I’ve been living month-to-month since it wasn’t notarized.
I have no idea what Washington law provides, but if your attorney is telling you that you don’t have a valid lease because Washington requires two year leases to be notarized, check what Washington provides on promissory estoppel. Promissory estoppel is an equitable remedy which will enforce a promise if the plaintiff has provided a benefit to the promissor and then plaintiff relied to his detriment on the promise. You typically can’t use this equitable remedy if you have a valid contract, but your attorney seems to be telling you that you don’t have one. You need an affirmative promise, but if you have that, it seems like you conferred a benefit by staying in the property paying rent and also incurred a detriment by not using the opportunity to move. Many states have a statute of frauds which requires contract lasting more than a year to be in writing. A lot of real estate contracts also must be written. That may trip you up. If the basic premise is that you do not currently have a valid lease, however, you might be able to use an equitable remedy to enforce a promise to rent. At a minimum, if you have an affirmative promise to enforce, it may force your landlord to reconsider and just enter a new lease.
It’s simple. If you have a contract, the terms of that contract govern. If you don’t have a contract, equity will imply one if you can demonstrate: (1) an enforceable promise; (2) a benefit you gave in exchange for that promise; and, (3) you relied upon the promise to your detriment. Statute of frauds could kill this idea.
I think we ultimately will but it would be great to have some kind of recourse after how they are/could be fucking us with this decision. Yeah it’s a simple idea but legalese makes it four paragraphs long. From my lease, this is all it has for term: From some landlord site: The central idea to your theory is that my lease isn’t a valid contract since it isn't notarized. Per the above, it looks like it's not invalid but actually just month-to-month. WA law only requires 20 days notice for a Termination of Tenancy for month-to-month. Clever idea but it seems like it won't work.
It appears that the Washington statute is a shorter version of a statute of frauds, shortening the time from one year to one month. Anything longer than a month must be written. This looks like a dead end.