Re: Judge Slashes Lawyer's Rate for Typos, Careless Writing
From: Charlie Chambers (cchamber@gorge.net)
Sun Feb 29 12:26:01 2004
Now that would be something, not that I'm holding my breath, if
attorneys were held to quality assurance panels with lay people
represented. How about practice standards algorithms and external
audits? What about peer review by competitors? Or a national barrister
database?
Ah, to dream such dreams.
************************************************************************
**
Charlie Chambers
--
Hood River, OR USA
cchamber@alumni. rice. edu
"I'm a goin fishin.
Yeah, I'm goin fishin
And my baby's goin fishin too!"
Taj Mahal
************************************************************************
On Feb 29, 2004, at 10:53 AM, DoctorJoe@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 2/29/04 07:22:23, dean@thehuffpeople.net writes:
>
> The Legal Intelligencer
>
> Finding that Brian Puricelli's courtroom work was "artful" in
> securing a
> $430,000 verdict in a civil rights suit, but that his written work was
> laden with typographical errors, a Pennsylvania federal magistrate
> judge
> has ruled that his court-awarded fees should be paid at two rates --
> $300
> per hour for the courtroom work, but $150 per hour for the pleadings.
> Judge
> Jacob P. Hart seemed almost amused as he described some of the
> writing as
> "nearly unintelligible."
>
> That's supposed to be an up-and-coming trend -- holding lawyers to
> standards (which are in some part already in place but people have
> tended to look the other way) and also to the ethical standards which
> are almost uniformly adopted by not uniformly applied.
>
> Some feel that it's the same as in medicine: In law, the "rules" are
> applied to the small and independent practitioner, but not to the
> members of large, successful (read here "they donate to the various
> judges's and politicians's reelection campaign") firms (often defense
> firms), just as in medicine, the "good ole boys" who are "in" with the
> hospital administration and own part of the clinic and are officers on
> the board are not held to the same standards (i.e. not hauled up
> before the credentials committee or reported to the state board) as
> independent doctors who might be labelled "disruptive" when they use
> novel or controversial therapies (e.g. LAVH in its infancy, HUAM,
> minimally invasive whatever, MTX therapy, etc.) (which, by the way,
> may make them more competitive - read here "they're stealing our
> patients by usin' that new-fangled stuff, so we gotta do sum'n 'bout
> it" - than the guys in the big groups).
>
> Any of you lawyers and lawyers-to-be get a feel for this in other
> states?
>
> My 0.02 Euros....
>
> Joe P.
>
> P.S. Those of you on the "continent," or the "Old Country," what are
> the fractions of a Euro called? I haven't been there lately.
>
