“The firm’s financial considerations played a part in the decision, [its spokesman] said, just as decreasing fees might cause a doctor to stop performing a certain procedure. ‘That does enter into it, just like any other decision,’ he said.”
The Editor of this blawg is on vacation, but his cousin skepticalEsq just stopped by and left the following Comment:
Let me see if I understand this: Just when “fair verdicts” will be especially hard and victims need devoted p/i lawyers more than ever to fight for every penny they deserve, firms are deciding to stop taking malpractice cases due to “financial considerations” like “decreasing fees.” Seems to me, the Trial Lawyers’ Association needs to do a little better spin control and pr training within its own ranks, before the public starts to think that 25% of the first half million dollars in non-economic damages is just too trifling an amount to attract a good p/i lawyer. We wouldn’t want Americans to get unduly cynical about their lawyers.