Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!bunker!wtm
From: era@ncar.ucar.edu (Ed Arnold)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: New to this echo...
Message-ID: <12648@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 7 Jul 90 05:01:02 GMT
References: <12547@bunker.UUCP>
Sender: news@bunker.UUCP
Reply-To: era@ncar.ucar.edu (Ed Arnold)
Distribution: misc
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Lines: 57
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP
Fidonet: Chronic Pain Conference

Index Number: 9059

In article <12547@bunker.UUCP> Liz.Petry@f316.n398.z1.fidonet.org writes:
>Index Number: 8962
>
>In addition, my attorney from my first accident stated..."That I am 
>not a contributing member of the financial status of the U.S. and 
>since I am a student I am literally useless..."
> 
>So, guess what?  My settlement was MUCH LOWER....about 8.  And, 
>after the attorney got his grubby hands on his 33 1/3 %, I was left 
>with @ $5200, and  I still cannot get the bills paid!
> 
>Sickening...
> 
>Give me your thoughts...

Settlements of this sort are usually based on an estimate of future
income done by a licensed (usually PhD economist).  Even when it
involves a small child, a person who (arguably) has *no* economic
worth to society, estimates of lifetime loss can usually be made
and reasonably argued, based on the economic status of the parents,
by a competent attorney.

In your case, with essentially your whole life ahead of you, the
argument that you are "literally useless" is ridiculous.  Someone who
had been a full-time university student most likely has quite a bit
of potential.  I would only expect an attorney to argue this way in,
e.g., the case of an older/retired person.

Several observations: (1) your attorney could be dishonest; (2) your
attorney could be incompetent; (3) the opposition may have had
evidence which your attorney considered damaging, and he figured
he would "cut a deal" to get the case out of his hair, without squaring
with you; (4) your attorney may be juggling dozens of cases (common
practice) and be so personally overloaded that he had to get rid of
this one; (5) this isn't a large case, so he may have not considered
it profitable/worthwhile to fight for; (6) ad nauseam, ad nauseam ...

This is the other side of the "lawsuit crisis" visited upon
us by the cretins of the insurance industry.  Perhaps you missed my
comments about the study earlier this year (specifically about
malpractice in New York State) which found that only 1 of 8 persons
*actually injured* by malpractice even bothers to sue.  Assuming you
weren't at fault, it sounds like you've become a victim of a system
of justice which as, of late, isn't working very well.

When I read stuff like this, it raises my blood pressure and makes
me *mad*.  But, that's about the only condolence I can offer ... aside
from my collection of lawyer jokes, of course, and that's too long and
inappropriate to post here.  Bill's got enough hassles, as the moderator
of the Usenet side of this conference, as it is ...
--
Ed Arnold * NCAR * POB 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000 * 303-497-1253(w)
era@ncar.ucar.edu [128.117.64.4] * era@ncario.bitnet * era@ncar.uucp
"See, the human mind is kind of like ... a pinata.  When it breaks open,
there's a lot of surprises inside."	--Jane Wagner/Lily Tomlin