Woman claims "I was sterlized against my will!" after having 9 children...

deepimpact2 · #1 01-04-2010, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by als463

How is talking about her abusing the system not relevant to thread? Other people said the same thing. It might be about that. It may not have been right for them to perform this surgery/ operation without her consent, but maybe instead of crying that she wasn't treated properly, we should give these Doctors a pat on the back.

P.S. Psi U MC Vito, I heart you...

If you give these doctors a pat on the back, that will only make things get out of hand. Then you may start having doctors sterilize ANYONE that THEY feel is abusing the system, without knowing anything about that person. I don't understand why any intelligent human being would support that kind of thing.

It is attitudes like yours that scare me when it comes to jury trials. Too often jurors get hung up on irrelevant issues and humanistic things and disregard the actual law. The sad part is that if the lawsuit goes to trial and gets to a jury, the jury will probably do the very same thing you are doing.

People need to understand that unsympathetic plaintiffs deserve their day in court as well if they have legitimate legal issues.

Kevin · #2 01-04-2010, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

People need to understand that unsympathetic plaintiffs deserve their day in court as well if they have legitimate legal issues.

Still though, the jury could find that a battery was committed, but only award nominal damages. That sort of thing [juries treating unsympathetic plaintiffs badly] is at the heart of our legal system. Despite being right on the law, it's still important to prove the moral righteousness of this case, and this lawyer might have a rough go of it.

deepimpact2 · #3 01-04-2010, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Still though, the jury could find that a battery was committed, but only award nominal damages. That sort of thing [juries treating unsympathetic plaintiffs badly] is at the heart of our legal system. Despite being right on the law, it's still important to prove the moral righteousness of this case, and this lawyer might have a rough go of it.

At least if they find a battery was committed, that won't result in free reign for doctors to do this kind of thing. Nominal damages are better than nothing. Proves a point.

Kevin · #4 01-04-2010, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

At least if they find a battery was committed, that won't result in free reign for doctors to do this kind of thing. Nominal damages are better than nothing. Proves a point.

Proves a point to the plaintiff's lawyer to not take cases like that again...

deepimpact2 · #5 01-04-2010, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Proves a point to the plaintiff's lawyer to not take cases like that again...

I don't know if I agree with that. What is the difference between this case and a case involving someone who goes in for a face lift and gets a breast reduction on her 44H's instead? I mean you could make the argument that she needed the reduction anyway for health reasons, but that's not what she asked for. The focus should really be on the fact that it appears that the procedure she requested was NOT the procedure that was performed.

If it later turns out that she asked for the ligation (which I doubt) then that would be a different story. But somehow I think if that was really the case, gag order or not, that information would have been leaked by now.

Kevin · #6 01-04-2010, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

I don't know if I agree with that. What is the difference between this case and a case involving someone who goes in for a face lift and gets a breast reduction on her 44H's instead? I mean you could make the argument that she needed the reduction anyway for health reasons, but that's not what she asked for. The focus should really be on the fact that it appears that the procedure she requested was NOT the procedure that was performed.

If it later turns out that she asked for the ligation (which I doubt) then that would be a different story. But somehow I think if that was really the case, gag order or not, that information would have been leaked by now.

I guess I wasn't being clear.

Hypothetically, if only nominal damages are proved on the battery, the lawyer is going to lose lots of money on this case. You're a law student, so you probably don't have a lot of experience at evaluating cases based upon whether they'll help you pay your student loans or whether they'll waste many hours of your time, cost you an arm and a leg and leave you with nothing.

deepimpact2 · #7 01-04-2010, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

I guess I wasn't being clear.

Hypothetically, if only nominal damages are proved on the battery, the lawyer is going to lose lots of money on this case. You're a law student, so you probably don't have a lot of experience at evaluating cases based upon whether they'll help you pay your student loans or whether they'll waste many hours of your time, cost you an arm and a leg and leave you with nothing.

Pro bono.

Publicity.

I don't have student loans.

I'm a law student, but I do have plain common sense. It is pretty obvious when some cases are a waste of time. Others, not so much. There isn't enough information to say it is a waste of time just yet.