Law Blog

What is an “auto product” you might be wondering? Your steering wheel, your car-seat, and your airbag are all examples of products that come together to make up your automobile. As with any other product, these things can malfunction. In the context of a moving automobile, when these things fail it can sometimes lead to serious consequences. This being America, what do people want to do when they are hurt? Sue!

In the past 12 months LegalMatch.com has been the destination for quite a few people looking for attorneys in their defective auto product claims. I decided to look at what injuries these products were causing, and here is what the data was telling me:

• Anxiety: 19%
• Difficulty sleeping: 14%
• Headaches: 12%
• Nausea: 4%
• Difficulty breathing: 4%
• Cuts and bruises: 3%
• Impaired vision: 2%
• Broken bones: 1%

A little while ago, we had an article debunking the myth that car accident lawsuits were a golden ticket to retirement. In reality, insurers fight these actions tooth and nail. Common injuries that do not exhibit obvious physical marks-such as neck and back pain-make a case more difficult to win.

This sage wisdom is relevant here because most of the injuries listed above aren’t visible. Maybe these folks have a perfectly valid warranty claim, but as far as product liability goes they may have an uphill battle. 

In fact only 6% of the above are the type of injuries that a doctor (and a jury) can see. The rest are based on doctor’s opinions and trusting someone’s word. Of course we all want to take someone’s word for it, but the insurance company that is being told to pay $100,000 because someone can’t sleep at night isn’t going to go down quietly. These plaintiffs should be ready for a fight.

I’ve written about our dysfunctional medical malpractice tort system before. In my opinion, attorney’s fees and court costs have a disproportionate stake in the economics of medical malpractice and health insurance in general, as opposed to what really matters: compensating the injured patient and disciplining the guilty doctor(s).

I decided to take a look at the top types of injuries claimed in medical malpractice cases submitted to LegalMatch.com in the past 12 months. Here is what I found:

• Possibility of future harm: 34%
• Long term or permanent loss of physical ability: 29%
• Short term loss of physical ability: 15%
• Disfigurement or cosmetic injury:  13%
• Minor injury: 6%
• No injury: 3%

More than half of the above claims are potential cases of doctor discipline if the claims are taken at face value. This means that in addition to a malpractice claim, the doctor can be subject to punishment by medical licensing boards.

Unfortunately, the stunning reality is that hardly any of the medical malpractice claims won by plaintiffs will result in doctor discipline. According to a study by Public Citizens Health Research Group, of all the medical malpractice payouts between 1990 and 2004, only 5.4% of doctors were subject to discipline. Even worse, of those doctors who had three or more medical malpractice payouts to plaintiffs, only 11.4% were disciplined. 

Why does that matter? Malpractice cases cost everyone money. They raise rates and they clog the tort system. If more doctors were subject to discipline for their negligence in addition to monetary sanctions, perhaps we would see less malpractice lawsuits? It would be a double whammy for doctors; they might take discipline more seriously and they might not be able to continue to practice if their negligence is brought before the proper authorities.

In fact, maybe we can get rid of malpractice lawsuits altogether? Establish some sort of board that can not only discipline doctors but extract compensation from them, or from some general client fund (such as those run by many state bars to compensate clients, like in California).

Certainly all the categories listed above face an uphill climb to get any compensation for the simple reason that litigating malpractice claims is costly. The big winners in our current malpractice system are not patients or the medical profession-they are (surprise surprise) the lawyers. Let’s change the equation and make this about good health and good medicine, not making money.

Methamphetamines have become the most commonly abused drug in California according to LegalMatch.com case statistics.  Since 2005, 55% of LegalMatch customers seeking drug defense attorneys in California have been accused of possessing or distributing methamphetamines.  Marijuana only makes up 26%, and Cocaine 10%.  These statistics match 2007 stats released by the California Attorney General showing that “dangerous drugs” (methamphetamines and barbiturates) made up 49.5% of all arrests in the state.

There has been a lot of talk recently about the legalization of drugs as a means of saving tax dollars and cracking down on crime. At last week’s “Internet Town Hall,” President Obama was asked whether he thought legalizing marijuana could help improve the economy and create jobs. He responded with a blunt “no” while the audience laughed and applauded the President’s ability to be the same as everyone else.

Of course, no one is seriously considering legalizing meth as a means of dealing with the problem of methamphetamine abuse. But could legalizing other drugs such as marijuana help law enforcement and drug treatment professionals concentrate on this more dangerous drug? After all, statistics (and health concerns) prove it is clearly California’s biggest drug problem.

I have previously opined on the likelihood of marijuana legalization saving us billions of dollars, but what about this other possible side benefit? California Judges, Probation Officers, and Diversion Programs will similarly be able to concentrate more of their efforts on dealing with the startling fact that 50% of drug charges in California now deal with methamphetamines. By freeing up resources to better treat meth abusers and reduce recidivism and future abuse, we may also reduce incarceration rates and save the state even more money.

In a sense, legalization of one drug could have a domino effect on our state’s treatment of other, more serious drugs. Perhaps if President Obama had decided to answer a more serious question, we may have gotten something more than derisive laughter.

Apparently thousands of Americans are not heeding dire warnings that Obama’s tax plan is going to ruin small business owners. (End sarcasm). Last year LegalMatch.com received thousands of requests for business formation lawyers. Our respondents told LegalMatch they were looking to create the following types of businesses:

• LLC (limited liability company): 45%
• Corporation: 17%
• S Corporation: 15%
• Nonprofit: 9%
• Partnership: 8%
• LLP (limited liability partnership): 3%

Don’t they realize there is an impending war on the rich and on business owners?! That this country is going to be socialist before the year is over?!?! (OK, now I am really ending the sarcasm, I promise…)

All jokes aside, LegalMatch.com statistics support the conventional wisdom that LLCs are the most popular type of new business in the country. Limited Liability Companies are a relatively new invention, but a powerful tool if one wants to limit their exposure while running a business.

Are lawyers helping this increase? Lawyers typically operate LLCs when they form their own small firm. The tanking economy is affecting everyone, attorneys included, and more and more attorneys are looking to go it alone. Newly minted attorneys, thousands of whom are regularly churned out every year, are facing stiff competition in a vastly shrinking field. Business is so bad (or is it good?) that an online university offering courses on how to build and run a solo practice has recently opened. Because clearly, the best thing a recent law graduate can do is spend more money on school. (I thought I stopped being sarcastic?)

Obviously new grads aren’t the only ones going it alone; the vast majority may be experienced lawyers or attorneys with a year or two already under their belt. As more and more biglaw firms collapse, we may be seeing more and more fragmenting in the legal community. This could be good thing for clients and attorneys. More lawyers competing may mean lower fees for our services, and more new lawyers getting out of their biglaw basements and acting like real attorneys means more experience and possibly more options down the line. In every crisis there is an opportunity; is now the time for a change?

In the past 2 years tens of thousands of clients have come to LegalMatch.com seeking real estate attorneys. I was curious at what stage in the real estate transaction people were seeking the help of an advocate. Listed below are the top reasons people cited, in order of frequency:

1. Give me general advice on how to proceed to protect my interests: 30%
2. Bring a lawsuit against the other party: 25%
3. Act as my agent in the transaction: 14%
4. Assist me in the remaining stages of the transaction: 13%
5. Other: 10%
6. Defend against a lawsuit filed by the other party: 5%

Thankfully, the vast majority of people are securing legal advice at the right time; i.e., before the deal goes down the tubes. Considering the fortune you are about to put down on your investment, it is always a good idea to get a legal assessment of a real estate contract, as well as legal advice concerning your rights and liabilities.

Unfortunately, 30% of people coming to LegalMatch.com have waited until something went terribly wrong to hire an attorney. This predicament is not unique to real estate. In almost every facet of society, lawyers typically do not get involved to prevent bad things from happening. They get involved once the mess has been made.

Now as lawyers we don’t always mind this. After all, we get paid to clean the mess up. And from a client’s perspective, not wanting to hire a lawyer until it is absolutely necessary is understandable. Attorney fees, even for an hour of advice and consultation, are expensive. (Arguably too expensive). It’s no secret there are also unsavory attorneys who will claim this or that needs to be done to try and milk even more of a client’s time.

For clients, however, the old adage that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure rings true. Solid legal advice before a big investment, a major business deal, or any significant endeavor can save lots of money, time, and anxiety down the road. One hour of a good lawyer’s time is a heck of a lot cheaper than one month.