Or all that talk of science and "facts" confused him.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/t...ience.html

I know about Daubert and the APA. What's your point? They're opining on the EPA's conclusion that air pollution kills and their method for determining how many are being killed, which is debateable, by applying a federal standard for evidence introduced in federal court to an administrative agency which is not even subject to the federal rules of evidence and more to the point, which has nothing to do with global warming. They're correct that the standard of review for administrative decisions is arbitrary and capricious, but whether they're meeting the federal rules of evidence standard in their own proceedings isn't relevant and certainly isn't dispositive. This is beyond stupid on so many levels. They're idiots, you're an idiot.

(03-30-2012 10:46 AM)Max Power Wrote:  I know about Daubert and the APA. What's your point?

That you're an idiot. Same as usual.

(03-30-2012 10:46 AM)Max Power Wrote:  an administrative agency which is not even subject to the federal rules of evidence

I think you've correctly identified the problem. Administrative agencies pretty much are not subject to anything, which is why they are unaccountable bureaucrats.

They're always subject to having their enabling statute repealed.

Admin agencies are set up to write rules and enforce those rules because Congress and the courts don't have the time and resources to debate and write all those regulations and hold full blown trials on every matter themselves. If Congress doesn't like how an administrative agency is handling something specifically, they can always pass a law addressing that specific way they're handling it.

Max, just curious, are you billing your clients/firm for the hours you spend in this board?

I do PI work, and like most PI lawyers I don't bill hourly but rather take 1/3. I work on my cases as much as I need to when I need to and some days are slower than others.

(03-30-2012 01:19 PM)Max Power Wrote:  I do PI work, and like most PI lawyers I don't bill hourly but rather take 1/3. I work on my cases as much as I need to when I need to and some days are slower than others.

You realize how many people could have slipped in Wal Mart in the time you've wasted bandwidth on here?

I will say that you being a PI lawyer is absolutely no surprise whatsoever.

(03-30-2012 11:19 AM)Max Power Wrote:  They're always subject to having their enabling statute repealed.

Yeah, like that's going to happen. Not when people like you buy into the nonsense, even as you openly admit they're allowed to generate nonsense.

(03-30-2012 11:19 AM)Max Power Wrote:  They're always subject to having their enabling statute repealed.

Admin agencies are set up to write rules and enforce those rules because Congress and the courts don't have the time and resources to debate and write all those regulations and hold full blown trials on every matter themselves. If Congress doesn't like how an administrative agency is handling something specifically, they can always pass a law addressing that specific way they're handling it.

Yeah. Right. Sure. And Big Brother always has your best interests at heart.

(03-30-2012 01:37 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(03-30-2012 01:19 PM)Max Power Wrote:  I do PI work, and like most PI lawyers I don't bill hourly but rather take 1/3. I work on my cases as much as I need to when I need to and some days are slower than others.

You realize how many people could have slipped in Wal Mart in the time you've wasted bandwidth on here?

I will say that you being a PI lawyer is absolutely no surprise whatsoever.

You do realize that Wal-Mart has top notch attorneys and very deep pockets to pay the best, right? It is VERY hard to win a case against Wal-Mart-especially in a slip and fall accident.

PS. This is not meant as a slam on Max or his quality as an attorney.

Spot on and no offense taken Robert. I've never sued Wal Mart and probably wouldn't take a Wal Mart case unless it's 100% clear cut and the plaintiff is sympathetic. Reasons being:

-The most skilled lawyers, who work together and specialize in defending Wal Mart
-Flooding me with discovery and generally being a dick about every issue that comes up, and never offering settlements except when discovery's over, liability's clear and my client will be liked by a jury (and even then they're low and probably won't cover the medical bills)
-Extremely good public reputation, so the jury likes them off the bat, throw in the fact everyone on the jury shops at Wal Mart so they're probably concerned their price of laundry detergent will go up a nickel if they give this injured person money

Ninerfan I hope you never slip or trip or are run into by a cart or something overhead falls on you or whatnot at Wal Mart, because good luck finding a lawyer to help you get your medical bills paid. It's called reaping what you sow.

(03-31-2012 06:50 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Ninerfan I hope you never slip or trip or are run into by a cart or something overhead falls on you or whatnot at Wal Mart, because good luck finding a lawyer to help you get your medical bills paid. It's called reaping what you sow.

In that case we should be hearing about you killing an unarmed black kid who was beating the crap out of you resulting in Al Sharpton protesting your not being arrested while Spike Lee tweets the address of the old couple that lives in your old house and the media convicting you before all the facts are clear any day now.

But at least now we know you're not for fighting for a client in as much as you are in getting the quickest extortion...er I mean...settlement you can so you can collect your 40% and move on to the next one.

Not everyone would sue Walmart because they don't know how to operate their own damn feet.

(03-31-2012 08:13 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Not everyone would sue Walmart because they don't know how to operate their own damn feet.

Exactly.

And I'm not a particularly litigious person by nature, so I'm not overly concerned.

Don't worry Max, there are plenty of people out there that are that you can continue to exploit for your financial gain.

PI Attorney = blood sucking lawyer who is generally a dick.

(03-30-2012 11:19 AM)Max Power Wrote:  They're always subject to having their enabling statute repealed.

Admin agencies are set up to write rules and enforce those rules because Congress and the courts don't have the time and resources to debate and write all those regulations and hold full blown trials on every matter themselves. If Congress doesn't like how an administrative agency is handling something specifically, they can always pass a law addressing that specific way they're handling it.

Congress has a stellar track record of eliminating or reducing red tape and bureaucracy.

(03-31-2012 06:50 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Spot on and no offense taken Robert. I've never sued Wal Mart and probably wouldn't take a Wal Mart case unless it's 100% clear cut and the plaintiff is sympathetic. Reasons being:

-The most skilled lawyers, who work together and specialize in defending Wal Mart
-Flooding me with discovery and generally being a dick about every issue that comes up, and never offering settlements except when discovery's over, liability's clear and my client will be liked by a jury (and even then they're low and probably won't cover the medical bills)
-Extremely good public reputation, so the jury likes them off the bat, throw in the fact everyone on the jury shops at Wal Mart so they're probably concerned their price of laundry detergent will go up a nickel if they give this injured person money

Ninerfan I hope you never slip or trip or are run into by a cart or something overhead falls on you or whatnot at Wal Mart, because good luck finding a lawyer to help you get your medical bills paid. It's called reaping what you sow.

I won't judge a man based on his occupation. I am however not a fan of much of the legal profession. I believe it is like Major League Baseball. Due to the expansion of it in membership...the talent is watered down and a lot of bench warmers make way too much money riding the bench.

Max, do you know worker's comp law? Does it vary by state? Can I ask you a question about something my company does?

Yes I do some workers comp. Yes it does vary by state. If you have a question PM me and maybe I can help you out to some extent.

No one in the legal profession is getting money for "riding the bench." There are too many lawyers gor the number of legal jobs out there, but there is still more demand than supply. That's because there are a lot of poor people who need legal help but can't afford it, and pro bono legal services are flooded with requests. And the excess lawyers can't spend all their time helping out these poor people even if they want to because they have student loans from 7 years of college, sometimes in the six figures. Justice in this country really is weighted in favor of the rich and the only times poor people can find legal help to assert their rights is when they get injured and people like me will work just to take a portion of the recovery. I'm certainly not making myself out to be a saint, I'm money driven like the next guy, just trying to illustrate for you the landscape a little bit and our system's shortcomings. People who complain about poor multinational corporations are either loopy or terribly misinformed.