Plaintiffs Side Trial Lawyers by jolinmilioncherie

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 15

									           Plaintiffs’ Side Trial Lawyers




Part III, Day 12                                                    1




                       Spencer Aronfeld, 
                   For Love or Money (2002)
    “Many would agree: The greatest trial lawyers are not always 
    the most profitable, and the most profitable are not always 
    the best. …

    “Great trial lawyers often take cases that make little or no 
    financial sense.  They look for cases in which a significant 
    wrong needs to be righted. …

    “I am in constant debate between my desires to be a great 
    lawyer and a profitable one.  I struggle, in my heart and in my 
    head, to decide with each case.  My ego and my wallet are at 
    war, and often they both lose. Yet without an ego—a strong, 
    undying motivation to win cases—no one can be a great 
    lawyer.”
Part III, Day 12                                                    2




                                                                        1
                                Indiana Enrollment
                                               (class of 2011)

    53.7% / 46.3% male to                                  53.8% Democrat / 
    female ratio                                           22.6% Republican

    Age                                                    2/3 have no lawyers in 
      – 39.8% = 22 years old or                            family
        younger                                             –    12% parents
      – 41.1% = 23 to 25                                    –    6.2% grandparents
      – 10.8% = 26 to 29                                    –    4.5% sibling
      – 5.4% = 30 or older                                  –    18.9% aunt or uncle

Part III, Day 12                                                                          3




                                  Indiana Enrollment
                                            (by geography)
                                            U.S. territory, foreign
                   West Coast/Rocky Mtns
                                             born, other, 2.7%
                    (including Hawaii &
                       Alaska), 10.2%


          Southwestern U.S., 1.6%


 Southeastern U.S., 9.7%

                                                                         Indiana, 46.2%


   Northeast/Mid-Atlantic,
           7.5%
         Great Plains, 1.1%




                Midwest, but not Indiana,
Part III, Day 12                                                                          4
                        21.0%




                                                                                              2
                    Rank Following Seven Attributes of Future Job
                                (% who ranked 1st or 2nd)
                                                   1st          2nd        1st or 
                                                  Choice       Choice       2nd
1. Work‐balance                                   45.2%         22.3%      67.6%
2. Social Purpose                                 20.7%         20.2%      41.0%
3. Professional Growth                            13.3%         13.3%      26.6%
4. Autonomy over my own work                       9.0%         12.2%      21.3%
5. Income                                          5.9%         19.1%      25.0%
6. Great Organization                              4.3%         10.1%      14.4%
7. Social Prestige                                 1.1%          1.6%      2.7%
 Part III, Day 12                                                               5




                          Factors in Enrolling in Law School
                            (“important” or “key” factor in decision)


   Interest in work                                                     96.2%
   Pursuit of social justice                                            71.8%
   Income of lawyers                                                    60.5%
   Keeping my options open                                              41.7%
   Social prestige of lawyers                                           33.6%
   Wanted a graduate degree; JD was the best option                     30.0%
   Want to run for elected office                                       12.0%
   Pressure from family                                                 10.2%
   Lack of other options                                                 3.8%

 Part III, Day 12                                                               6




                                                                                     3
                        Heinz‐Laumann
                    “Two‐Hemisphere” Theory

 Continuum of                                                  Does
(a) overlapping                                            professional
practice areas,                                           autonomy and
and (b) relative          Personal      Corporate         independence
 prestige and             Litigation    Litigation        move this way?
remuneration
    of work
                           Office         Office
                         Practice for   Practice for
                          Persons         Corps




 Part III, Day 12                                                   7




             Who is Right – Redish or Lubet? 
 “The overwhelming force behind the actions of private plaintiffs’
 attorney is now and always has been greed. … [T]here is a strong 
 likelihood that in making strategic decisions during the course of 
 the litigation, these private attorneys will continue to be 
 motivated solely by their own personal interest.” ‐‐ Redish, 
 Smoking Gun for Private Lawyers in Tobacco Suit (Chi. Trib. 1997)

 “The much maligned litigation system works pretty well.  
 Individual lawyers … actually do seek out and expose dangerous 
 conditions.  Without the work of trial lawyers, there is no telling 
 how much longer Firestone tires would have remained on the 
 road, causing further rollovers and death.” – Lubet, After the 
 Firestone Debacle, Ya Gotta Love Lawyers (Chi. Trib. 2000).

 Part III, Day 12                                                   8




                                                                           4
          “I think we need tort reform to curb the 
                number of frivolous lawsuits”
                  Class Survey 2004 & 2006
                    10%       5%         Agree

                                         Somewhat
            22%                          Agree
                                         Neutral
                                   43%
                                         Disagree

                                         Strongly
                   20%                   Disagree


Part III, Day 12                                      9




          “I think we need tort reform to curb the 
                number of frivolous lawsuits”
                     Class Survey 2008
                         5%   9%         Agree

              23%                        Somewhat
                                         Agree
                                         Neutral
                                   32%
                                         Disagree

                                         Strongly
                   31%                   Disagree


Part III, Day 12                                      10




                                                           5
                   Where did High‐End Plaintiffs’
                    Lawyers go to Law School?
           Inner Circle Trial             Sample of Am Law
               Lawyers                       200 Firms



                        32%
                                              36%

               68%                                      64%




            Top 25 Law School    Non-Elite Law School

Part III, Day 12                                                     11




              Parikh & Garth, Philip Corboy and the Construction of the 
                        Plaintiffs’ Personal Injury Bar (2005)

The referral system ensures that the higher value cases will, as a 
general rule, work their way up through the hierarchy of the 
plaintiffs' bar, thereby reinforcing the stratification in the 
profession and the dominance of the prevailing elite. As Parikh 
[2001] found in her examination of the lawyer referral system, 
personal injury lawyers work hard to develop and maintain 
these referral relationships, and having a referral‐based business 
is a sign of prestige in the personal injury bar. Corboy reflected 
that "I think there is a feeling of accomplishment when another 
lawyer recognizes your specialty. . . I like getting business from 
lawyers who think I'm competent." P. 368.



Part III, Day 12                                                     12




                                                                           6
               Parikh & Garth, Philip Corboy and the Construction of the 
                         Plaintiffs’ Personal Injury Bar (2005)

 In Corboy's terms, "I contribute money and I raise money for 
 whoever the candidate is. I consider it my responsibility. If I'm 
 concerned about how government is run, I believe it's my 
 responsibility to become involved in the government. That's my 
 way of doing it." With this widespread practice, plaintiffs' 
 lawyers are now among the nation's largest group of 
 contributors to the Democratic Party. Indeed, between 1994 and 
 1999, Chicago's elite plaintiffs' lawyers contributed an average
 of $21,000 each per year to state‐based political campaigns and 
 political action committees (Parikh 2001).  P. 376




 Part III, Day 12                                                     13




               Parikh & Garth, Philip Corboy and the Construction of the 
                         Plaintiffs’ Personal Injury Bar (2005)
By the 1970s, Corboy already began growing the next generation of 
plaintiffs' lawyers in Chicago. …

Dubbed by some as the "Philip Corboy University College of Law," 
Corboy's firm became the training ground for many of today's most 
successful Chicago plaintiffs' lawyers. …

As we see in Corboy's hiring and mentoring of Tom Demetrio, Bob 
Clifford, and others like him at the top of the plaintiffs' bar, the 
senior partners reproduce themselves in their hiring practices, 
often hiring working‐class young men like themselves who attended 
a local law school. This preference for hiring lawyers "like 
themselves" and hiring them from local law schools creates barriers 
to entry for young lawyers who do not fit these characteristics. P. 
379‐81.
 Part III, Day 12                                                     14




                                                                            7
              Martin & Daniels, The Making of a 
                  Plaintiffs’ Lawyer (2006)
                       Table 6. J.D. Degrees (N=261)

   Law School            U.S. News         State   Plaintiffs’   Difference
                          ranking           Bar       Bar            +/-
   Baylor                  Tier 2           7%      10.0%         +3.0%
   Houston                 Tier 2           12       12.6         +0.6%
   SMU                     Tier 2              9      8.4          -0.6%
   South Texas             Tier 4           12       18.8         +6.8%
   St. Mary’s              Tier 4              8      9.2         +1.2%
   Texas                   Tier 1           21       14.9          -6.1%
   Texas Southern          Tier 4              3      3.4         +0.4%
   Texas Tech              Tier 3              7      9.2         +2.2%
   Texas Wesleyan          Tier 4              2      1.9          -0.1%
   Out of state                             20       11.5          -8.5%

Part III, Day 12                                                                        16




              Martin & Daniels, The Making of a 
                  Plaintiffs’ Lawyer (2006)
    Table 9. Distribution of Plaintiffs Lawyers
            by 2004 Income (N=298)
  Income                               Percent
  Under $50,000                         9.1%
  $50,000-$74,999                        10.1        BB1
  $75,000-$99,999                        6.7
                                                                   Large distribution of
  $100,000-$124,999                      13.4
                                                                   income within sample
                                                     BB2
  $125,000-$149,999                      8.1                       • ~ ¼ making less than
  $150,000-$199,999                      11.4                      $100K per year
  $200,000-$249,999                      11.1        HH1           • ~ ¼ making more than
  $250,000-$299,999                      5.0                       $300K per year
  $300,000-$399,999                      6.4
  $400,000-$499,999                      6.4
                                                     HH2
  $500,000-$749,999                      4.0
  $750,000+                              8.4
Part III, Day 12                                                                        17




                                                                                             8
               Martin & Daniels, The Making of a 
                   Plaintiffs’ Lawyer (2006)
             Table 10. Characteristics of PlaintiffsÕ Lawyers Grouped by Case Value
                                BB1 (N=55)          BB2 (N=76)        HH1 (N=76)         HH2 (N=75)
Average case value                $6476*              $20908*           $98862*           $886923*
                                  $6500**            $20000**          $100000**          $500000**
% Sole practitioner                52.7%               47.9%             36.8%               17.3%
% 2 to 5 lawyers                    45.4                47.9              48.7                53.3
% plaintiffs’ work                 73.5%*              78.4%*           86.6%*              89.4%*
                                  80.0%**             90.0%**           95.0%**            95.0%**
Number of open                     116.9*              41.2*             61.0*               18.7*
contingency fee cases              50.0**              24.5**            15.0**              9.0**
Number of calls/month              56.6*               17.9*             25.8*              17.0*
                                   15.0**              12.0**            13.0**             10.0**
Percent of calls signed            30.8%*              32.1%*           19.1%*              8.8%*
% of cases signed to a K          25.0%**             25.0%**           10.0%**             5.0%**
                                           * Mean, ** Median

 Part III, Day 12                                                                                    18




               Martin & Daniels, The Making of a 
                   Plaintiffs’ Lawyer (2006)
        Table 10. Characteristics of PlaintiffsÕ Lawyers Grouped by Case Value (cont’d)
                               BB1 (N=55)          BB2 (N=76)         HH1 (N=76)         HH2 (N=75)
% of cases from:              former clients:     former clients:       other p.i.         other p.i.
(top 2 by percent)               38.8%*              36.6%*             lawyers:        lawyers: 27.8%*
                               YP: 16.7%*        non-p.i. lawyers:       23.3%*         non-p.i. lawyers:
                                                     22.0%*          non-p.i. lawyers       22.9%*
                                                                         22.3%*
% handling no auto                 3.6%               6.8%               17.1%               52.0%
% of caseload med mal             1.4%*               7.5%*              9.0%*               23.9%
% of caseload (top 3)           auto: 60.3%*      auto: 45.8%*        auto: 28.5%*      med mal: 23.9%*
                               family: 7.5%*     med mal: 7.5%*      med mal:9.0%*         products:
                              criminal: 6.5%*     commercial:           products:           15.3%*
                                                     7.4%*               13.1%*          auto: 11.4%*
% certified in personal           21.8%               38.4%              40.8%                32.0
injury trial law
Net income from practice of    $112,500**          $112,500**          275,000**          $275,000**
law
 Part III, Day 12                          * Mean, ** Median                                         19




                                                                                                            9
                Martin & Daniels, The Making of a 
                    Plaintiffs’ Lawyer (2006)
               Table 11. Considerations in Decision to Become a Plaintiffs’ Lawyer
                                           Importance
Considerations                   Very      2      Somewhat      4    Not at All   Mean   (Ns)
                                  1                  3                   5
Desire to serve individual       52.2%   31.5%      11.2%     2.9%     2.2%       1.71   (276)
clients
Interest in litigation           53.5    21.1        18.2      5.1      2.2       1.81   (275)
Desire for independence in       47.4    28.8        13.9      4.4      5.5       1.92   (274)
undertaking legal work
Desire to serve the public       40.5    32.5        16.8      7.7      2.2       2.00   (274)
interest
Expectation of financial         18.1    37.0        33.3      8.0      3.6       2.42   (276)
reward
Career opportunities available   23.0    20.0        25.6     13.7      17.8      2.83   (270)
at the time


 Part III, Day 12                                                                           20




 Part III, Day 12                                                                           21




                                                                                                 10
                   Bench Trials, Indiana State Court




Part III, Day 12                                       22




                    Jury Trials, Indiana State Court




Part III, Day 12                                       23




                                                            11
Part III, Day 12                                   24




                           Query
      If, as an empirical matter, government 
      agencies prove themselves to be ineffective at 
      protecting the public from the harms they are 
      charged with regulating, should we permit 
      plaintiff‐side law firms to redress these harms 
      through class action litigation?



Part III, Day 12                                   25




                                                         12
                   What’s the Story with Trans Fat?
          “Although trans fats are found in small amounts naturally 
    (primarily in some animal‐based foods), almost all of what we 
    get in our daily diets are manufactured. They're created when 
    food makers add hydrogen to vegetable oil, a process called 
    hydrogenation, which turns liquid oils into stable, long‐lasting 
    solids, such as shortening and many stick margarines. If you 
    see "partially hydrogenated vegetable oil" on an ingredient 
    list, you know the food contains trans fats. The food industry 
    loves these fats: They're a cheap, effective way to make 
    crackers crunchy, french fries crispy, cookie fillings creamy 
    and frozen foods more flavorful. They also extend these 
    products' shelf life.” Shape magazine, Sept. 1, 2004, at 200. 



Part III, Day 12                                                            26




                   What’s the Story with Trans Fat?
   “Trans fat is one of the most dangerous players in the human diet for 
Cardiovascular disease risk …
   “Trans fat is a danger because it packs a one‐two punch on a person’s 
lipoprotein profile.  Consumption of trans fat leads to both an increase in …
[bad LDL] cholesterol and a decrease in … [good HDL] cholesterol. No other 
dietary factor has both of these adverse effects. … But this double whammy 
means that trans fat is much worse than … saturated fat, which increases LDL 
levels but also increases HDL.
   “Trans fat poses other dangers as well. It interferes with normal
metabolism of essential fatty acids, leading to disruptions in the production 
of various hormones and clotting factors.
   “There is also … evidence that  dietary trans fat can trigger insulin 
resistance and type 2 diabetes.” Family Practice News, Sept. 15, 2003, at 13.




Part III, Day 12                                                            27




                                                                                 13
                   What’s the Story with Trans Fat?
      According to a recent study comprised of a 
      group of 80,000 women:

       – Every 5% increase in saturated fats increases the 
         risk of heart disease by 17%

       – Every 2.5% increase in trans fats increases the risk 
         of heart disease by 93%
         The New Yorker, Mar. 5, 2001, at 52

Part III, Day 12                                                 28




                   What’s the Story with Trans Fat?
   “Trans fat … has become public enemy No. 1 at the grocery 
store.  Numerous studies have linked the fat to heart disease, 
diabetes and Alzheimer’s, and recent legislation in Canada and 
the U.S. requires large manufacturers to list trans fat content on 
special nutrition labels by January 2006.  The substance isn’t 
banned, but failing to remove the fat … could prove fatal to a 
firm’s bottom line.
   “Indeed, those unable to make the shift could be in a lot of 
trouble.  McDonald's Corp. has struggled since September 2002 
to remove trans fat from its french fry recipe ‐‐ missing its own 
deadline set for early last year.  The main problem?  Flavour.  
"It's a big job," says Ron Christianson, spokesperson for 
McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Ltd.  "Our french fries are 
famous and we don't want to change their taste in any way."
Maclean’s, Mar. 29, 2004, at 24.
Part III, Day 12                                                 29




                                                                      14
                    Stephen Joseph, filed “Oreo”
                        lawsuit against craft




Part III, Day 12                                                               30




                   What’s the Story with Trans Fat?
   “[S]ome 30 years ago, as a graduate, [Mary] Enig [PhD] stumbled upon 
research suggesting that the official line being touted by the government and the 
corporate food world was probably a long way from the truth. …
   “‘Here’s the paper I wrote that made me realize just how much hot water I 
could get myself into on this issue, says Enig … . She pulls out a folder now wilting 
with age and waves a 1978 article published in the Journal of the Federation 
American Societies for Experimental Biology.  In it, she argued that a major 
government report correlating cancer with saturated fats was, in fact, wrong.  
The data cited in the report showed a much stronger link between cancer and 
trans fats … .
   “‘Not too long after that, these two guys from the Institute of Shortening and 
Edible Oils—the trans fat lobby, basically—visited me and, boy, were they angry,’
[Enig] recalls. ‘They said they’d been keeping a careful watch to prevent articles 
like mine from coming out in the literature and didn’t know how this horse had 
gotten out of the barn.’” Gourmet magazine, June 2004, p. 101.


Part III, Day 12                                                               31




                                                                                         15

								
To top