Should the lawyer pay $1,000,000.00?

[ralphwiggum]

While I don't think there was an intent on the part of the mother to harm the plaintiff, from the lack of facts I'm going to assume there were actions taken that, if they were not taken the plaintiff would not have been hurt.

Nope. There were no actions taken by mother. The plaintiff was hurt, for a big $amount, because the plaintiff hired an idiot. but I don't blame the plaintiff - he lost a lot of money and lost even more money by hiring the lawyer. I blame the lawyer.

Suing someone when you know your claim is a lie is a tort called (depending on the specific facts) either abuse of process or malicious prosecution. But it's impossible to prove.

There is nothing I would like more than to take $1,000,000 away from a lawyer who pulled a dirty trick. Not because the lawyer has 'deep pockets.' which most lawyers do, but so he (and every other lawyer) would never do it again, and maybe it would save a person's life. The only people who are concerned about a person's pockets are lawyers.

I was sitting incourt one day, and observing the way the lawyers talk, and walk, and act, and I don't think I've seen anything so repulsive in my life. Not repulsive as in doing anything illegal. But repulsive as in 'inhuman.' Maybe we can get the law schools to teach a course on 'being human.'




.

 

[stephenk]

Who are you to the whole case? If you aren't the son, then most, if not all, of what you posted is just guessing about what happened.

Unless the son was mentally incompetent, the son directs the case. If the son knew his mom was ill from the case he could have easily dismissed the lawsuit. If his attorney disagreed the son could have fired the attorney and dismissed the case on his own. My belief from what you posted is that the son also believed he could get money from mom.

Let me guess, mom and son really didn't get along in the first place.

 

[ralphwiggum]

A manufacturer lost a lot of money because they hired an incompetent person
who allowed a 'kid' a lot of credit when she shouldn't have. Of course the kid did some things which were wrong - but walked away with nothing after two years of hard long hours of work.

the kid walked away with nothing after two years of hard work but some of much older employees were exceptionally happy with their wages. Kids shouldn't go into business but they did. None of the kids family had time to even see what he did.

so kid was bankrupt. The manufacturer of the items that kid was trying to sell in his business then decided that they would hire a lawyer to place fear into the older lady so she would pay the money. I was able to see first hand what extreme stress does to a person. When the lawyer started his attacks the woman was healthy. Exactly the day when the lawyer dropped it two years later, the woman's health problems began, and lasted for ten more years.

I'm not out of line to estimate the damages at $1,000,000. But do not worry. There is no way I would consider trying to tell the lawyer to pay. I know that it can't be proven. Yes, some other things were also stressful at that time. But the lawyers actions were the biggest in my opinion. Maybe some good will come out of posting the story on this forum.




.

 

[stephenk]

"Exactly the day when the lawyer dropped it two years later, the woman's health problems began, and lasted for ten more years."

Huh? Why would her health problems begin after the lawsuit was dismissed? You would think her health problems would have started when she was first sued. Have the lawsuit dismissed should have been a stress release not a stress enhancer.

 

[ralphwiggum]

You're not really thinking too clear, are you?

While a lawyer is tormenting you, your health problem is getting worse.
But when the lawyer quits tormenting you, that is when your real fun just begins. that is when you can begin to spend $50,000 on medical costs, and suffer, and never solve the problem.

get it?