May 24, 2013
May 22, 2013
They launched the 'Arab Spring' but now yearn for the good old days of a strongman
May 20, 2013
Richard A. Serrano: Is Meir Kahane's assassin now a changed man?
Genetic copies of living people from embryos no longer science fiction
Jewz in the Newz by Nate Bloom :
The Kosher Gourmet by Cathy Pollak:
Jews Inducted into Rock Hall of Fame; Anton Yelchin co-stars in New "Trek" film; Kutcher (but not Kunis) visits Israel; Jewish TV Star Praises Jewish Rap Star
WARNING: This WALNUT CAKE WITH PRALINE FROSTING, perfect for afternoon coffee, is addicting
May 13, 2013
Rabbi Nathan Lopes Cardozo: Why the giving of the document that would permanently change the world could only be done in desolation
David G. Savage:
Church-state, literally? Supreme Court weighing public school graduation in a church
May 10, 2013
Rabbi Berel Wein: Be all that you should be
May 8, 2013
Peter Ford: Why China is welcoming both Israel's Netanyahu and Palestinians' Abbas
Obama administration quietly backs out of appeal over new contraceptive mandate
At Kerry-Putin meeting, US-Russia relations thaw --- a tad
The Kosher Gourmet by Leela Cyd Ross :
Almost too pretty to eat, this colorful salad with Sicilian inspiration will tickle the taste buds and delight your visual sensibility
May 6, 2013
May 3, 2013
Kids, kittens the Same?
With employee perks at struggling Internet pioneer Yahoo! it's hard to tell
Artificial kidney offers hope to patients tethered to a dialysis machine
April 29, 2013
Poland's new Jewish museum celebrates life, doesn't revisit Holocaust
Terrorism in America: Is US missing a chance to learn from failed plots?
Boston Bomber's 'Svengali' Revealed
Tiny satellites + cellphones = cheaper 'eyes in the sky' for NASA
April 26, 2013
Clifford D. May:
Defense in the Age of Jihadist Terrorism
Sharon Palmer, R.D.:
How to feel your best -- with plenty of energy, a healthy weight and optimal mental and physical function -- without driving yourself batty
April 24, 2013
Jewish World Review
Dec. 7, 2005
/ 6 Kislev, 5766
The enormous cost and creativity-killing pace of ordinary civil cases
In recent months, we've seen seemingly endless arguments over
the Supreme Court. But as I watch people comb through old documents and
parse interviews for clues to the nominees' positions on high-profile
constitutional questions, I'm struck by how little attention has been given
to one of the biggest problems in America's judicial system: the enormous
cost and creativity-killing pace of ordinary civil cases.
In my years doing consumer reporting, I watched every American
industry find ways to do things better, faster, and cheaper. Today's
computers cost less, but are more powerful. Cars got better. Supermarkets
offer more for less. Most every business is better.
But not the law business. In law, everything is slow and
expensive, and our choices limited.
For $1 I can buy a newspaper, and every day it's different. But
try to get a divorce or a simple will for less than $300.
The lawyers defend their fees and snail-like pace, saying,
"We've got to make sure you get due process." Glad they're so concerned. But
when there's no money in a case, people have trouble getting a lawyer, let
alone getting due process. When there is money, lawyers even insist on undue
process. In the O.J. Simpson trial, they even quibbled about the jewelry the
other lawyers wore.
Other businesses pad bills, too, but competition limits it.
There's less competition in law because lawyers outlawed competition from
outside their profession they prosecute paralegals who offer cheaper
alternatives, calling it "unauthorized practice of law." And they are all
bound by rules of procedure, drafted by lawyers and, for the federal courts,
issued by the Supreme Court, that call for volumes of paper and make lots of
work lucrative work, if you're a lawyer.
Civil cases usually take years. It almost makes me feel sorry
for the people who sue me. A guy in Philadelphia who said I damaged his
reputation had to wait four years just to get me into court.
The essence of my story was that Irwin Rogal, a dentist, ran a
dental "mill," telling people (including me, after he examined me for a
"20/20" story) we had jaw problems, and then charging big bucks for dubious
"treatments." In his lawsuit, he claimed he had not recommended treatment to
Sounds simple for a court to resolve. The exam was on videotape.
The jury could watch the 40-minute tape and then decide. But that never
happened. Instead, the dentist's lawyers and mine spent three years sending
legal papers back and forth. My lawyers (did I mention they were paid by the
hour?) demanded that the dentist produce vast amounts of paperwork detailing
"all persons other than your attorneys with whom you have had written or
oral communication" and "each workshop or seminar in which you have
participated as a speaker."
The dentist's attorneys demanded that we "state the title and
author of each book that was used as a source of information, the name and
date of publication of each newspaper, magazine, pamphlet . . . documents .
. . " In case we didn't know what documents were, they spelled it out: "Any
abstracts, accounts, accounting records, accounting advertisements,
agreements, bids, bills, bills of lading, blanks, books, books of accounts,
brochures" that's just the A's and B's.
Eventually, my case got to court. I assumed the jury would watch
the tape, but they never did. Instead, we had war. War is what a lawsuit is.
Each side played snippets of the videotape. His side played a few minutes
that made it seem as if he hadn't recommended treatment; my side played a
few that demonstrated he did. This happened again and again for days. It
was ridiculous. That's what got to me most, watching my case: the
extravagant waste. Even with lawyers charging hundreds of dollars an hour,
the judge just let it go on and on.
I finally won, but the ordeal cost ABC a fortune. Why couldn't
the judge say, "Shut up. This is a waste of time and money. We're just going
to play the tape."
"Because most judges are afraid to offend," Joe Jamail, a Texas
lawyer who's made millions, told me.
So these lawyers are just self-indulgent? "No," said Jamail.
"They were being paid."
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
Give Me a Break
Stossel explains how ambitious bureaucrats, intellectually lazy reporters, and greedy lawyers make your life worse even as they claim to protect your interests. Taking on such sacred cows as the FDA, the War on Drugs, and scaremongering environmental activists -- and backing up his trademark irreverence with careful reasoning and research -- he shows how the problems that government tries and fails to fix can be solved better by the extraordinary power of the free market. Sales help fund JWR.
JWR contributor John Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News' "20/20." To comment, please click here.
© 2005, by JFS Productions, Inc.
Distributed by Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Richard Z. Chesnoff
Frank J. Gaffney
Victor Davis Hanson
A. Barton Hinkle
Judge A. Napolitano
Cokie & Steve Roberts
Debra J. Saunders
J. D. Crowe
Ask Doctor K