Cleavage in the Courtroom - It’s Court, Not A Cocktail Party

Down in Rutherford County, Tennessee, Judge Royce Taylor had received complaints about the way women were dressing, and he decided to put a stop to it.

Tort Holidays: When have two wrongs ever made a right?

Consider for a moment the bad architects and engineers who find every disaster a marketing opportunity with no cost for shoddy advice. Is that the design world you've come to rely upon? Is offering free advice that kills you really free? Is asking for a liability holiday really being a Good Samaritan?

Can lawyers afford to be altruistic in every case?

In some cases the property damage doesn't justify hiring a lawyer or suing in small claims court. It's all about economics and paying the bills, not altruism.

Why do unqualified people running for Congress think picking on lawyers is a good idea?

Apparently Laureen Cummings is a nurse and she’s running for Congress from Old Forge, Pennsylvania. She’s asserting that being a lawyer is somehow a disqualification to be in Congress.

Medicine: Public versus Private Professional Disciplinary Hearings

Going public with a disciplinary hearing is a difficult decision to make. On the one hand you want to make sure you get a fair hearing and a public hearing seems to some extent make that more likely.

Legal Ethics: A lawyer’s reputation for honesty is his most valuable tool.

How do you know if your attorney is being truthful about the personal injury case if the office is already under unethical issues?

The Cow Jumped Over The Moon

A woman was driving on Iowa Highway 150 near Hazelton when she struck and killed a horse. This story reminded me of a previous blog I wrote on the Iowa Edict.

Should I, as a lawyer, expect the plumber to fix my leaky pipes for free?

If you were a plumber would it be alright for me to ask you to fix my sink without getting paid? If not, then why is alright to ask lawyers to?

Motorcycle Accident in Johnson County, Serious Injury and Fatality

For whatever reasons drivers just don't see motorcycles. Turn on your light, actively look for oncoming riders, put the cell phone away and pay attention.

Another motorcycle crash out of Jackson County, Iowa on May 5, 2012

The people on the motorcycle are so exposed; this weekend there was a head-on crash; questions? ask Attorney Lombardi. 515-222-1110 sdlombardi@aol.com

Traffic Violation Cameras intrusive, but reliable witnesses in MVA’s

Traffic violation cameras, lawyer, Steve Lombardi, car accidents, personal injury, proof, evidence, video tape of collision, Iowa. sdlombardi@aol.com

Construction Site Safety: Fall Arrest and Fall Protection Gear Save Lives

Most of us aren’t the slick stereotypical lawyer the politicians describe. Real life pi lawyers are more akin to gumshoe investigators hard working, harder nosed with hearts hardened by thousands of real life sad stories with no good ending. From across wooden leather topped desks stare wetted eyes looking to the lawyer for how to pay the grocery bill. To them the lawyer is their safety net. There are no fast cars, faster women or slick shiny suits; only a box of Kleenex the lawyer tosses their way. That’s what lawyering is all about for me; Kleenexes and putting food on the table. To date, what are the facts we know about Mr. Fosdick who died?

Why shouldn't Lindsay Lohan be held in contempt of court?

Lindsay Lohan has to be held in contempt of court. Otherwise the message from the Court is clear: The Court isn’t to be taken seriously and lawyers are fair game. If that be the case good luck finding a lawyer to represent those clients who pose a danger to lawyers involved in the proceedings. Lawyers seen as the antagonists are the most unprotected of all court personnel.

Participation Trophy Awarded to the Financial Planner with the Wrong Plan

What do you do when a professional you relied on for financial services steals your money? Lately there have been too many stories about financial fraud by professiionals. Why? Why are there so many looking for shortcuts to achieve wealth and success? Perhaps sociaty is just sending the wrong message about developing a plan and exercising patience. I refer to it as the Participation Trophy Syndrome.

A Roundup about Legal Blawgs with an Iowa Connection

Today I thought we’d do a blawg or blog roundup for Iowa. A few of these blawgs aren’t in Iowa but they concern Iowa law. If you’re from Iowa this is probably interesting, if you’re not; then not so much.

If there are too many lawyers why can't I find a lawyer to represent me?

The public and the courts can’t have it both ways; you can’t ask lawyers who are struggling to stay afloat financially, to take time away from clients that pay a fee and to do free legal work for unappreciative clients and judges. Simply put you can’t support free legal services with pauper lawyers. Just as the judges aren’t able to run a court system neither are lawyers able to run profitable law offices.

The Publics’ Attitude about Lawyers in General, Will Eventually Hurt You

As lawyers we need to talk directly to the public and when they create unrealistic expectations we need to take them on directly and stop pandering to unrealistic public perceptions. After all we are lawyers not priests. We are licensed to protect people not to foster priestly reputations. Yes we need to be honest but no we don’t need to be slandered with what bad things our clients or a few bad lawyers choose to do. There is rampant corruption in government, with those who do business with our government, in business and running Wall Street.

The Lawyer Can't Get You into Heaven; Fact is we aren't even trying.

The public needs to stop trying to hold lawyers to the standards of acting like saints and priests. We are lawyers, trained in the law and advising our clients about the law; we aren’t offering advice to get into Heaven. We don’t make decisions about what legal advice to dispense based on what the public wants or for that matter needs. We aren’t St. Peter standing at the Pearly Gates deciding who gets in and doesn’t get into Heaven. Save that for your own consciences and for the confessional.

If Lawyers Were Priests You'd Be In Trouble

In this instance it appears from the editorial that Judge Huscher’s ruling had to do with transferring assets in anticipation of a judgment; a legal concept of which I am familiar. If I understand the sequence of the actions, no one had yet been charged with a crime when the trusts were created and deeds transferred. What should the lawyers have done? Should they have questioned and then accused their client of being a murderer? It’s not reasonable to create ethical duties and obligations that have no practical application or that erode a person’s right to get sound legal advice that carries out the client’s wishes. And what was impliedly suggested does exactly that.

Patient Safety: When hospitalized how do you protect yourself from limb amputations?

Here is an interesting story about a woman’s whose claims against the hospital and physicians were found by a jury to have no merit. The jury found no negligence or liability on the part of the medical team that she alleged misdiagnosed her condition, but saved her life, the condition of sepsis resulting in the amputation of her arms and legs.

She is Lisa Strong, 45 years of age who shares custody of a 9-year old son and a 10-year old daughter. Following the amputations her marriage ended.

What was her condition upon admission to the hospital?

According to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel article -”Despite what she told them, doctors misdiagnosed her condition for several hours. She went into septic shock, forcing her immune system to battle infection by protecting the heart and cutting circulation to her limbs. Doctors had to remove them to save Strong's life.”

Did anyone admit liability? [i.e., Did any medical care worker admit to making a mistake?]

“Both sides agreed there was an error made. Where they disagreed was over who, if anyone, was responsible, and whether there was negligence or malpractice.”

So what if anything went wrong?

Apparently upon admission a team of medical personnel examined her, came up with several diagnoses that conflicted to some degree, and no one doctor took over the care. At trial the doctors blamed each other. What appears to have gone wrong for Ms. Strong was no clear channel of authority making medical decisions and forcing the doctors to make the hard decisions.

Is this an unusual case?

I wish I could say it is but it isn’t. Brazilian beauty queen Mariana Bridi da Costa, 20, a Miss World recently died after a similar situation. Like Strong, the doctors thought Bridi had kidney stones; she went into septic shock, followed by leg and hand amputations. But in Ms. Da Costa’s situation she died.

“The Espirito Santo State Health Secretariat said in the statement she died from complications related to a generalised infection, Associated Press has reported.

It was caused by the bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa, which is known to be resistant to several kinds of antibiotics.

Bridi had been in the hospital in the city of Serra in south-eastern Brazil since January 3.

She became ill in December and doctors originally diagnosed her with kidney stones, local media said.

Mariana Bridi da Costa had been in a hospital in Serra, in the south-eastern state of Espirito Santo, and on artificial respiration following the procedures, according to several newspapers.”

Brazilian Model Mariana Bridi has hands and feet amputated

UTI leads to septic shock then to multi-system organ failure – original diagnosis “kidney stones”

Playing the finger-pointing-blame-game to create a red herring.

Defense lawyers use a defense that I refer to as the finger-pointing-blame-game to distract the jury. When the defense case seems hopeless, point the finger at each other, argue the entire case and hope the jury thinks the case so complicated that they find the Plaintiff is lucky to be alive. In this case, if it were used, it was done effectively and worked for the defense.

“Lawyers for the defendants said they felt compassion for Strong, but argued that the medical case was more complicated than it first appeared and Strong is lucky to be alive.

"Forty percent of the people who suffer what she did, die," said Jim Nosich, who represented the emergency room physician who first saw Strong. "It was a complex medical issue," said Isabel del Cid, attorney for the doctor who admitted Strong to the hospital.

But the two lawyers clashed, each blaming the other's client for botching the diagnosis. Strong's lawyer has filed a motion for a new trial, with the dispute between del Cid's and Nosich's clients at the center.

One of the doctors "led all of the subsequent physicians down the wrong path with a diagnosis of cholecystitis," a kidney infection, Shipley is asserting.”

The forty-percent die argument is another red herring. Let me explain. I’m not a gambler but had an occasion to visit a casino in St. Louis. On the wall was a sign, “We return 60% of the money gambled as winnings.” Some people look at that sign and understand they have a “good chance of winning”. I looked at it an thought, “Wow, a 40% tax. For every dollar I bet chances are I’ll see less than .60 cents returned.” And so when the defense lawyer points out that 40% of the people who suffer this condition die, he’s just pointing out the negative obvious. It could also be said that 60% of those who enter the hospital with this condition live and had doctors done their job Ms. Strong would not have suffered the fate she did. Apparently in this case the jury didn't think so.

Was this really a complicated medical issue?

Knowing I’ve not read the medical records or the deposition testimony I’m cautious about drawing any firm conclusions, but I doubt it. Medicine always involves complicated diagnosis and decisions concerning treatment. So what’s different about this case? Nothing really. It was an infection. Isn’t that what doctors and hospitals are trained to diagnose and treat? If beyond their experience the doctors needed to call in for a consult with a specialist or two, run more tests and listen to the expert medical doctors. Did they? Can’t tell from the article. What did the E.R. doctors do for the hours that passed between admission and the realization amputations would be necessary? Who did they consult with and what additional tests did they run? What were the findings and follow-up?

What is sepsis?

Sepsis development and progression

Was Lisa Strong misdiagnosed? “This isn’t Kansas.”

10TH LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH IN THE UNITED STATES LARGELY UNK

How do you recognize kidney stones?

Kidney Stones: A Sign of Something Worse? (Dramatic Health) – Joeseph Del Pizzo, M.D.

Dehydration, not enough water and salt and not a sign of underlying kidney disease.

What is really going on here?

Doctors have a tough job. Some days they have a thankless job. I don’t know these doctor who tended to Ms. Strong’s care and yes, they had to make tough calls, but that’s what they get paid so handsomely to do. They are supposed to be the best and brightest of the professions. In the end these types of decisions come with the territory.

So what is the answer?

Well the answer which many of you won’t want to hear is it’s about tort-reform. The cornerstone of tort reform argues unnecessary tests leading to increased costs and too many lawsuits by injured patients. This case is a good example of the kind of health care we can expect in the future from tort reforming measures. A lack of testing, inconclusive diagnoses, bad results and jury’s who don’t care to put in the time to figure out what went wrong and who look for any excuse to find against the Plaintiff. If the tort-deformers get their way people like Ms. Strong won’t even be able to have their day in court. And neither will you. As you’re reading this don’t think your case will be any different than Lisa Strong’s; it won’t.

The old saying what goes around comes around seems only too appropriate in this instance.

Construction Safety: Fellow construction worker killed by crane operation

Today we are going to report the news of a crane accident that took a man’s life. Tomorrow we will look at it as a trial lawyer must, analytically. Between now and tomorrow you can think about where you would find useful information about the crane, information you will need to understand a large piece of equipment that most trial lawyers will never operate, but have to understand.

Here is the news report. The crane’s front outriggers began to suddenly sink into the ground which caused the crane and its boom to fall forward into a wall. As construction workers shouted warnings a welder with his mask on was unable to hear and was killed by the falling boom.

Now consider the worker’s widow comes to you asking for your help to understand if her husband’s death is compensable outside of normal workers’ compensation benefits. Where can you look to become more familiar with the crane’s operation? Assume the crane operator refuses to be interviewed.

First you need to know about the outrigger system. Crane outriggers are part of a crane’s stabilization system. For a good explanation see the diagrams and photographs or outriggers at How Stuff Works.

“The outriggers are only one mechanism used to balance the crane during lifting operations. There are also detachable counterweights that can be placed on the back of the crane on the underside of the cab. These counterweights prevent the crane from tipping forward during operation. The amount of counterweight needed for a particular lift is determined by the weight of the load, the radius of the boom and the boom's angle during operation. The 70-ton Link-Belt truck crane has counterweights that come in 4,000-pound (1,814-kg) sections. Counterweights are only used during lifts; they have to be removed before the truck can be driven. “ www.HowStuffWorks.com

Will this be enough to plead the case?

You can’t plead a case without having some knowledge negligence was likely. Without renting a crane and trying it out in your backyard, where do you get the crane operation education you need? Let’s take that up tomorrow. Until then get online, search, read, think and then do it all over again. Try thinking outside the box.