The post Test appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

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 American Medical Association’s president, Jesse Ehrenfeld, recently called the physician shortage a “public health crisis.””

Here is the link to the story in Kaiser.

More Patients Are Losing Their Doctors — And Trust in the Primary Care System

The post More Patients Are Losing Their Doctors — And Trust in the Primary Care System appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

“We understand the burden that in-camera inspections put on busy trial judges,” the panel said. “Nevertheless, that burden may be necessary to protect privacy rights.”

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1814333?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2024-03-19&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=11?copied=1

The post Med Mal Plaintiffs (Still) Have Privacy Rights 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.

When I entered the classroom each new school year, I became responsible for teaching a group of strangers who may not have wanted to be there, about a subject that they may not have wanted to learn and were largely ill-equipped to understand. This easily could be considered the job description of a trial attorney.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1812240?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2024-03-14&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=12?copied=1

The post What Do Trial Lawyers Have In Common With Teachers? appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

Under the law, punitive damages cannot be levied against a defendant if they’d already been hit with punitive damages for the same conduct, provided the court determines they have already been punished enough, according to the opinion. Sommers had argued the court was wrong not to make this determination, the panel said.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/personal-injury-medical-malpractice/articles/1810847?nl_pk=029cff45-637f-44e3-babf-75563f8e0bfd&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=personal-injury-medical-malpractice&utm_content=2024-03-07&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=4?copied=1

You can read about my experience litigating punitive damages here.

The post Punitive Damages appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.

According to the lawsuit, Morton-Maxson had a family history of bladder cancer and doctors noted the growth was “likely cancer.” But UW “lost the surgically removed tumor prior to conducting the requisite pathological review and left plaintiff without a clear diagnostic or care plan,” the complaint stated.

Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1808991?e_id=e4cf434f-bdad-44b4-85d2-994f5bf03cea&utm_source=engagement-alerts&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=similar_articles?copied=1

The post Hospital Settles Missing Tumor Suit After Admitting It Can’t Find It appeared first on The Thompson Law Firm.