The attorney-client privilege protects private communications between a client and a lawyer. This sensible rule promotes a full and frank discussion so that the client can get the best advice without the interference of prying eyes and ears. It assumes the communications are strictly private – not in the presence of anyone other than the client and lawyer. It also assumes no disclosures to third parties that would waive the privilege – by the client or the lawyer. Here’s an example to illustrate the point: Let’s say that early in my career handling plaintiffs’ medical malpractice claims, a client drove his car through a hospital’s glass front. The fact of the accident is not attorney-client privileged. I could write about the fact that my client was found in his car, half in and half out of the hospital window, without violating my ethical duty to the client. However, my private discussions with my client (before and after) would be privileged, and I couldn’t share them on my blog.

Work-product privilege protects our thoughts, impressions, and strategies in the case—as long as they are not shared in public or with any unauthorized third party (authorized third parties, for instance, would be the many vendors used to help work the case, and the privilege binds them). Staying with our example, my thoughts and opinions about my client ending up in his car half in and half out of the hospital plate glass window would be privileged unless and until I made those thoughts or opinions public as part of my client’s case. Included is any discussion of how or why my client told me he was found in his car, half in and half out of the hospital.

Generally speaking (and hypotheticals aside), my job is to pursue civil remedies to obtain justice for my clients. The most effective way to do this is to take steps toward a jury trial. The right to a jury trial is the foundation of every settlement and verdict obtained. The Seventh Amendment to our Constitution is dishonored whenever the right to a jury trial is impaired or legislated out of existence.

The Seventh Amendment right to jury trial comes from the Magna Carta – the King’s deal to avoid violence with his subjects by guaranteeing certain rights, including the right to jury trial. Causing violence to property and persons is always counterproductive to pursuing a jury trial. But that assumes the existence of a meaningful right to a jury trial, as guaranteed by our natural rights under the Constitution.

The post Lawyer blogs are boring and jury trials are good. #7A appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

Early America adopted English common law and a long history of cherished rights, including the right to trial by jury – which dates back to 1215. In that year, Pope Innocent III issued an order validating a person’s right to a trial by peers. That same year, at Runnymede in England, King John was forced on a battlefield to sign Magna Carta – the ancient pact he made with English Barons, including a stipulation to man’s right to “the lawful judgment of his peers”. These are the events that first set rule of law above kings.

A kid gunned down a health insurance CEO as he walked a busy Manhattan sidewalk into a shareholder’s conference. In America, there’s a certain passion surrounding guns and the Second Amendment. The Surgeon General issued an advisory about an epidemic of gun violence and deaths resulting therefrom. U.S. Surgeon General Issues Advisory on the Public Health Crisis of Firearm Violence in the United States

Firearms are the leading cause of death for American children and adolescents. HHS Report on Firearm Violence in America

At the same time, Americans have lost respect for our justice system in record numbers according to Gallup. Trust in court system at record low: Gallup

There are many reasons for both of these trends. They aren’t all related. But here is what I propose. We need a movement similar to the #2A movement to promote jury trials, a right guaranteed by the Seventh Amendment to our Constitution. And we need to invest time and money into improving our court systems and their rules so they can demonstrate their importance to our system of governance.

Self-defense and a well-regulated militia should be a last resort. There wouldn’t be a need for violence if we took our jury trial rights as seriously as our gun rights. Project 7A is designed to start that process.

The post What is Project 7A? appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

Given recent events, I am going to work on that.

The post Learn To Fish appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

The Florida Supreme Court’s recent decision not to reinstate a nearly $31 million jury award against a bar that served alcohol to an underage person who later crashed into a pedestrian was the right call, experts said, and provided much needed clarity on the state’s dram shop statute.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1813400?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2024-03-18&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=0?copied=1

The establishment in question is a Tallahassee watering hole near the FSU campus frequented by students. Its owner is a locally well-known donor to conservative legislators and the University. If you ignore this and blithely chalk the result up to unidentified “experts” cheering, you’ve done a grave disservice to the plaintiff, the plaintiff’s lawyer, and especially the jury. What a monumental waste of time and resources.

The post This Kind of Courthouse Reporting Reveals a Bias Against Plaintiffs appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

Law students who would traditionally experience only a few courtroom scenarios over a semester have begun working with programs that can provide an entire array of courtroom curveballs, thanks to large language model artificial intelligence technology.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1804884?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2024-02-21&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=1?copied=1

Based on real-life experiences, I have suggestions for “curveball” fact patterns to throw at these kids. Here’s one for starters:

Say you’re trying a case against your old boss and his client. It is a two-week-long medical malpractice case involving a birth injury and a brain-damaged baby with moderate to severe cerebral palsy. The defense attorney for the hospital – your old boss – is scheduled in another medical malpractice trial at the same time in a different court. In response to his plea for a continuance (to which you object), the Judge indicates she plans to force a trial of your client’s case each morning for four weeks while his other case is tried for four weeks in the afternoon. Go, young people. What do you do?

The post Law Students Are Learning To Be Trial Lawyers In A “Flight Simulator” appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

An insurance company that wanted to avoid defending a company that inspected and certified an amusement park drop tower ride that fatally ejected a 14-year-old boy failed to prove that it had served the defendants with notice of its suit, putting an early end to its case, a Florida federal judge decided Tuesday.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1770639?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2023-11-29&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=15?copied=1

The post Pitards and Hoisting Come to Mind appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

The Sixth District Court of Appeal on Wednesday reversed a Collier County Circuit Court judge’s order granting Universal Property and Casualty Insurance Co.’s motion to dismiss a suit brought by its policyholder Rebecca Hughes, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Citing the Florida Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Menendez v. Progressive Express Insurance Co. , which established a two-part test to determine whether a statute enacted after a policy’s issuance applies retroactively, the panel concluded that Florida Statute Section 627.70152 cannot be applied retrospectively.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1769725?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2023-11-28&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=11?copied=1

The post Florida Homeowner Insurance Claims Hoops That You May Have To Jump Through appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

A Florida jury tacked on $50 million in punitive damages to a roughly $211 million award to the family of Maya Kowalski, the child at the center of the Netflix documentary “Take Care of Maya,” against Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital for mistreating Maya to the point that her mother took her own life.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1739675?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2023-11-13&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=0?copied=1

I have been following this case and blogged about it

here (“A Difficult Case”), 

here  (“I Was Afraid This Would Happen”), and    

here (Juror Questions).

Medical malpractice cases are difficult on their own. When you add novel issues regarding damages and liability, they can become overwhelming. In addition, this case was tried in a jurisdiction considered by most trial lawyer to be relatively conservative.

I tackled similar issues in a neighboring county. You can read the results of that successful appeal

here (Estate of Thomas versus Lee Memorial Health System).

I have nothing but complete admiration for Maya’s family and their legal team for this brilliant result and wish the best for them during the inevitable appeal.

The post A major victory for Maya’s family, their lawyers, and patients everywhere. I cannot overstate how impressive this work is under difficult circumstances. appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

What does the holiday for Day of the Dead mean?

The post Day of the Dead – One Trial Lawyer’s Thoughts appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

Here (Estate of Thomas v. Lee Memorial)

But what if trauma experienced without any other physical contact – other than the seeing or hearing it – changed the brain in some way? Would that satisfy the impact rule? I am glad that some judges are asking these questions. It could be a game changer for people whose lives have been affected by witnessing horrible trauma.

“How is the brain different from a finger?” the judge asked. “Why isn’t the injury to the brain physical? And why isn’t the brain’s interaction with the device physical?”

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1721210?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2023-10-30&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=0?copied=1

The post The Impact Rule appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.