High On Poker

*** WARNING: NO POKER CONTENT ***

I was at Court last morning at a conference. The conference went nowhere, since the defendants are refusing to give me certain records that I am legally entitled to receive.  Since I was staring down an end date for discovery (the time in which the parties can seek information from each other before certifying the case ready for trial), I had no choice but to make a motion to the Court asking that they extend the time for discovery and order the defendants to give me my records. This, in turn, meant that at the conference, nothing could be done, since the motion was still pending.

The most frustrating aspect, though, was when I was idly chatting with the two defense attorneys. Neither were the primary attorneys on the case, so they are not fully aware of the facts and history of the litigation. Regardless, during some idle chit-chat, one of the attorneys complained about having to come to Court again. I replied, “If you’d just settle with me, this case would be resolved and you wouldn’t have to show up for anything.” The other defense counsel replied in an almost condescending tone, “Counselor, you know that you’ll get your money, but in the meanwhile, we have to make ours.”

What did that statement mean? It meant that even though I was obviously going to win my case, the defense counsels did not want to settle early because this would cause their law firms money. It’s goddamn criminal.

This is why insurance rates are so high, including medical malpractice insurance rates. The mismanagement of litigation to the benefit of defense counsel is disgusting. In fact, the whole legal system is largely disgusting due to con men legal practices, where the client is an afterthought and profits are the number one priority.

Let’s just use a simple example in personal injury. Polly the Plaintiff was hit by a car while crossing the street at a crosswalk, breaking both of her legs. It is obvious to all parties that Polly was not at fault, and that Dickhead the Defendant was. Polly sues Dickhead and Dickhead’s insurance company, Incompetent Insurance, hires the Loser & Loser law firm, usually at a low hourly rate since the insurance company has lots of cases and therefore firms like L&L are willing to take lesser rates for ensured volume.  The case is assigned to Angie the Associate.  She gets her bonuses and/or gets to keep her job depending on whether she bills a certain number of hours per year. It’s a slow year for Angie, due in large part to the economy or perhaps because Loser & Loser does such a poor job that they don’t have many clients or cases for her to bill. Even though everyone knows that Dickhead is going to pay Polly eventually, Angie works up the case like a madwoman, fighting minutiae, getting multiple adjournments (so she can bill for each appearance, even though they are created by her), and arguing BS points. She is merely seeking her hours so that she can earn her bonus and Loser & Loser can bill Incompetent Insurance. On Incompetent Insurance’s side, there is an Izzie the Insurance Adjuster, who is overworked and overwhelmed. She relies on Angie’s memos that suggest that the case is worth fighting. Or she simply doesn’t even think about the Polly v. Dickhead case because she has other cases to worry about that are near trial, when the pressure is really on.

The result? Angie continues to bill for useless work, and then eventually Incompetent Insurance settles anyway, after paying thousands of dollars in additional legal fees. If anyone in that process would just do the honest thing, analyze the case, and perform a risk-benefit analysis, the case could have settled months, if not years, earlier. But that is not our system.

That is what is occurring in my present case. The defendants are stalling so they can charge more money to their insurance carriers. The BS stall tactics are institutionalized and encouraged with the bonus system or pressure placed on attorneys at L&L. L&L, in turn, benefits from these dishonest practices. Incompetent Insurance is wasting money left and right on every case, and then, when their books show that they are losing money, they don’t complain about their own incompetence or the wasteful actions of the attorneys they hired and let run wild; they complain that there are too many frivolous lawsuits and huge verdicts. They then point to the McDonald’s case as an example, even though the $2 Million + verdict in that case was reduced to several hundred thousand (and incidentally, the $2 Million + figure represented one day of McDonald’s coffee sales and was intended to put pressure on McDonalds to stop serving scalding hot coffee since they had ignored other warnings and prior injuries).

Online poker is rigged? The law is rigged, my friends. The system is built on a house of lies.

Until next time, make mine poker!