Articles Posted in Miscellaneous

But not really. Forseeability in tort law is a complicated concept, but one thing is undeniably true: for a duty to arise or legal cause to exist one need not be able to (or actually) foresee the precise type of harm that resulted. Instead, one only need be able to foresee that the risk of harm would arise. A shopping center defendant sued for negligent security in its parking lot cannot (successfully) say “well, I knew there has been and would be car thefts and car break-ins in our lot, but it never crossed my mind that someone would be raped there.”

The Bush Administration is now claiming that the government’s slow response is because it had no idea that the devestation would be so bad.

Well, read this release from the National Weather Service from Sunday, August 28, 2005:

Read here for an analysis of the impact of the death of Chief Justice Rehnquist.

I know that you are going to contribute to a Katrina relief fund – that is the type of person who reads this blog – but I urge those of you who are lawyers to do so through Trial Lawyers Care, an ATLA affilliated organization. Go here to help.

Trial lawyers do care, and one way to demonstrate that to people who don’t think so is to show our generosity collectively. Trial Lawyers Care gave tens of millions of dollars of free legal services to 9-11 victims; the people along the Gulf Coast are now in need.

Our hearts go out to those we know and those we don’t in our sister states to the south. I cannot imagine what those folks – and their families across the nation – are going through right now.

No substantive post today.

OK – so it is a recycled joke. Most of them are.

How many Bush administration officials does it take to change a light bulb? Ten

1. One to deny that a light bulb needs to be changed;

I mentioned the other day that we would be hosting a couple of seminars in December, the first designed to help newer lawyers and the second designed for those with a little more experience. You can read more about both programs, and register on-line, by clicking here.

I wrote the other day about Rev. Robertson’s suggestion that the United States kill a foreign leader. Here is the post.

August 22, 2005: Believe it or not there are people who get there news from Pat Robertson. This man, who runs a tax-exempt empire that he holds out as a church, now has called for the assassination of the leader of a foreign country.

What does the rest of the world – particularly the Muslim world – think about America when one of us who is prominent to have his own TV show calls for the murder of a foreign leader? When a nut in the Muslim world does this we call him a savage and a terrorist.

Believe it or not there are people who get there news from Pat Robertson. This man, who runs a tax-exempt empire that he holds out as a church, now has called for the assassination of the leader of a foreign country.

What does the rest of the world – particularly the Muslim world – think about America when one of us who is prominent to have his own TV show calls for the murder of a foreign leader? When a nut in the Muslim world does this we call him a savage and a terrorist.

See the words and watch the video of “our” nut here. And then think about the fact that right now in some cave in Pakistan this video is being shown to a bunch of angry young men with guns, bombs, and a willingness to sacrifice their lives in the name of their religion.

Many of you have read about the silicosis case in Texas that a judge threw out of court. This case will have repercussions for all plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ lawyers, as explained in this article from Bloomberg.com.

I do not know if the allegations against the plaintiff’s lawyers in the silicosis case are true. I have read portions of the opinion and must admit that what I read there was troubling. If lawyers worked with doctors to manufacture cases the punishment should be swift and significant. We simply cannot allow lawyers to create claims that don’t otherwise exist. It is one thing to advise people of their rights. It is ok to try to advance the law. It is quite another to create “injuries.”

This case is the mass tort McDonald’s case, folks. You will see it used as a tool to hurt the cause of all PI claims, especially those in the mass tort field. You can count on it.

Last night I posted the 300th post to this blog in a little less than six months. We have had tremendous success – we have lots of people who visit this site regularly and who have told us that they enjoy what we have to offer.

What can we give you that would help you in your practice? Would you like more information about appellate cases from around the country? Should we spend more time on Tennessee law? Are you interested in the status of the tort reform debate around the country?

Let me know your thoughts. Use the “Comment” link or, if you would rather send me your thoughts privately you can email me at jday@branhamday.com.