You all should read up on what he made his money on…like corporations that put out knowingly a defective product that could have saved a few parents and children a lifetime of misery for just a couple of bucks that the CEO was unwilling to part with…

Actually, no. His targets of choice were doctors and hospitals, not corporations.

LINK

But it just sounds so much more credible if you can blame an eeeevil businessman, doesn’t it?

And what sort of cases did Edwards specialize in? From the link above:

Edwards became one of America’s wealthiest trial lawyers by winning record jury verdicts and settlements in cases alleging that the botched treatment of women in labor and their deliveries caused infants to develop cerebral palsy, a brain disorder that causes motor function impairment and lifelong disability.

One small problem with that: the medical theories Edwards presented – for example, that the CP could have been prevented by a C-section delivery – were unfounded junk science. And Edwards knew it:

Edwards argued his first cerebral palsy case in 1985 and was pressing such cases at least through 1995, according to the NYT. As the Times notes, “in the 1980’s, scientists began to challenge the premise that medical care during delivery had much to do with cerebral palsy.” A two-volume report from the Institute of Medicine, entitled Medical Professional Liability and the Delivery of Obstetrical Care, in the course of exploring its subject, built a substantial case that many obstetricians were being wrongly sued. It appeared in 1989….But to say no one was sounding the alarm about junk science in CP cases until after Edwards was through handling such cases seems plainly wrong.

Stephen may hate corporations in general and despise the capitalist system that has made our way of life the envy of the rest of the world, but he shouldn’t try to make excuses for a dishonest greedy lawyer by blaming them when they weren’t even involved in most of his cases.

Aren’t we all just so perfect?

I’m speaking of the trial involving the swimming pool circulation pump covers for one…

The problem is with most of the corporate opponents of Edwards putting forward trash talk is that they can’t even imagine having to be RESPONSIBLE.

I would dare most corporations to go back to the 1800’s where the predominant form of business was partnerships if they feel that they are doing such a swell job of being responsible and ethical. Instead most are deliberately lying whenever they can and then trying to hide behind a screen of corporate personhood like Phil Knight at Nike. Or some even resort to paying off Congress just to prevent any liability cases from moving forward. Insurance scheming makes it mandatory for the private individual to spend huge money just to prosecute because most State Corporation Divisions don’t even move on a flagrant violation reported to them for fear of teeing off some corporate party donor.

Some trial lawyers won’t ever make as much as Edwards did …like mine who took a case on involving only $40,000 in damages. I sure was glad my lawyer was there with his not only good looks and styled hair but also with a well paid for education. It took close to 8 years to win.

As for the cost of malpractice suits I just heard of a study just completed on states where the medical claim amounts went down and the premiums still went up…Just who is BSing who about these costs being all the lawyer’s fault.

Kind of like people who rail against frivilous lawsuits and then file frivilous lawsuits when they stub their toe.

You know, people like Robert Bork.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, so let’s look at the rest.

Also, Dr. Stuart Weinstein isn’t just an orthopedic surgeon, he’s also chairman of Doctors for Medical Liability Reform.

Meaning that Dr. Weinstein has a better grasp of the issue than this leftist does. Thanks for admitting it.

And while it instinctively makes sense that if a doctor becomes a higher insurance risk their insurance will go up – the link isn’t always so clear cut.

It’s not that a doctor “becomes a higher insurance risk”. It’s not like he’s a driver who’s caused three accidents, and thereby become a higher risk. It’s solely because he’s in a profession that’s been targeted by a greedy plaintiff bar and uses junk science to win cases, and for whom the poster child is John Edwards.

Particularly since in states where tort reform has been passed, insurance rates have not gone down substantially.

Because tort reform needs to be also instituted at the federal level. State laws aren’t the only ones that predators like Edwards use to file suits.

But of course, the end result is exactly as the editorial pointed out. Edwards telling people without medical care that he’s there to help is like an arsonist complaining that the fire department took too long to put out one of the fires he set.

You know, people like Robert Bork.

Also, Dr. Stuart Weinstein isn’t just an orthopedic surgeon, he’s also chairman of Doctors for Medical Liability Reform. And while it instinctively makes sense that if a doctor becomes a higher insurance risk their insurance will go up – the link isn’t always so clear cut. Particularly since in states where tort reform has been passed, insurance rates have not gone down substantially.

You could say that once the doggie gets the bone, it’s unwilling to let go. In other words, there’s some insurance company gauging also going on.