 |
Re: Job Insurance? An investment portfolio or a second marketable skill
Author: OPRRMS
Date: 03-03-2011 - 19:06
T Judah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > So based on all this, should I assume that all
> lawyers and paralegals are
> > money-grubbing ambulance chasers and all-around
> scumbags?
>
>
> Sounds like that one might have been a bit scummy.
>
>
> It's strange that this wasn't handled on a
> contingency basis. She would have paid little or
> nothing up front, maybe not even a much of a
> retainer. But then the lawyer would have gotten a
> fixed percentage of the winnings. On the other
> hand, if there were no winnings, he would have
> gotten little or nothing.
>
> Of course, no lawyer will take a contingency case
> unless he believes, that not only is there a good
> case, but that there is enough money in it to be
> worth his time. Any honest practitioner would
> have been up-front about that; and strongly
> recommended that if your own lawyer doubts it's
> worth his bother, it's probably not worth your
> bother either.
Exactly.
So, just because my mother had a disappointing relationship with one lawyer, it doesn't mean that she would've had the same experience with all lawyers. See my point?
As an aside, most if not all railroad unions have outside Designated Legal Counsel that their members can avail themselves of. And they work on a strict contingency basis.
-------------------------------------------------------
> > So based on all this, should I assume that all
> lawyers and paralegals are
> > money-grubbing ambulance chasers and all-around
> scumbags?
>
>
> Sounds like that one might have been a bit scummy.
>
>
> It's strange that this wasn't handled on a
> contingency basis. She would have paid little or
> nothing up front, maybe not even a much of a
> retainer. But then the lawyer would have gotten a
> fixed percentage of the winnings. On the other
> hand, if there were no winnings, he would have
> gotten little or nothing.
>
> Of course, no lawyer will take a contingency case
> unless he believes, that not only is there a good
> case, but that there is enough money in it to be
> worth his time. Any honest practitioner would
> have been up-front about that; and strongly
> recommended that if your own lawyer doubts it's
> worth his bother, it's probably not worth your
> bother either.
Exactly.
So, just because my mother had a disappointing relationship with one lawyer, it doesn't mean that she would've had the same experience with all lawyers. See my point?
As an aside, most if not all railroad unions have outside Designated Legal Counsel that their members can avail themselves of. And they work on a strict contingency basis.
