Blog

I have practiced law for 35 years and I hope I am lean though not mean. Why lean? Because a plaintiff lawyer’s margin for error is not great. Nowhere does this apply more than in the selection of cases. Actually, it works to a client’s advantage because why would a lawyer, especially one who works on a contingent fee, take your case unless he/she thought that there could be a recovery?

I recently received an e-mail on “jury tips” in personal injury cases. In it the lawyer spoke of the punitive element of some jury decisions. Well, we do not have punitive damages in Massachusetts.

A claim can be settled at many different points in the process. People are surprised that a claim can be settled pre-suit, that is before a formal lawsuit has been filed in the court. They can indeed.

The subject of today’s blog is experts and expenses. Experts are a necessary part of any major, or even not quite so major, personal injury case. You need experts: you need them for damages and, many times, you need them for liability. In those cases where you need experts to help to establish liability, the case will not “get to a jury” without them. In other words, the judge will not let a jury render a decision in the absence of certain expert testimony.

This blog is a little different from my ordinary blog. Typically, I focus on the handling of my cases, which are exclusively personal injury matters. I discuss laws pertaining to them and what I see as common issues that arise. Today, this is more of a discussion about law firm management. I thought of this topic because I was asked by my legal alma mater, The University of Pennsylvania Law School, to come to Philadelphia to speak to a class on law firm management.

Recently somebody asked me what question do you get the most from clients? It is hard to quantify, but I do know one question that comes up quite a bit. That question involves timing: “How long will all this take?” I would have to say that is the question that is put to me many, many times, and is probably the most common question.

In the last three blogs I have been talking about a softball injury that happened at a U.S. Army National Guard outing and it involved a significant injury to a thirteen-year-old boy. The thirteen-year-old had claims for his physical injuries. Because the judge found the government through its supervising officer was 80% negligent, the boy was able to recover 80% of his injuries.

In the last blog I touched on loss of consortium damages. As you would know from reading the last several blogs, I have been focusing on a case that was tried in the federal court before a judge. It was tried under what is called the Federal Tort Claims Act. The judge in this jury-waived case issued a detailed opinion, something we don’t see in a jury trial.

In the last three blogs I have been talking about a softball injury that happened at a U.S. Army National Guard outing and it involved a significant injury to a thirteen-year-old boy. The thirteen-year-old had claims for his physical injuries. Because the judge found the government through its supervising officer was 80% negligent, the boy was able to recover 80% of his injuries.