On 17 Jul 2003 16:23:09 -0800, Floyd Davidson wrote:

I *still* wouldn't hire you to take care of something involving,
say, _medical_ _law_, or _Indian_ _law_, or _environmental_ _law_.
(Just some random examples because the lawyer I know best does
the first and has a degree in the last two.)

Actually, while I had my short private practice, I volunteered at
the County Free Legal Clinic and handled administrative law cases,
primarily landlord-tenant cases. Administrative law is, after all,
administrative law.... ggg

But you are right. Anything requiring the type of expertise in the
areas which you cited above requires an expert, and I for one
wouldn't even think about taking such a case.

The best lawyer in medical malpractice was my erstwhile friend and
law school upper-classmate role model who, in addition to being a
top notch lawyer, was the assistant chief of OB-GYN at a major hospital
in suburban San Francisco. Bill died a number of years ago - the doctor
didn't take good enough care of his diabetes. A real tragedy.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

On 17 Jul 2003 16:23:09 -0800, Floyd Davidson wrote:

I *still* wouldn't hire you to take care of something involving,
say, _medical_ _law_, or _Indian_ _law_, or _environmental_ _law_.
(Just some random examples because the lawyer I know best does
the first and has a degree in the last two.)

Actually, while I had my short private practice, I volunteered at
the County Free Legal Clinic and handled administrative law cases,
primarily landlord-tenant cases. Administrative law is, after all,
administrative law.... ggg

But you are right. Anything requiring the type of expertise in the
areas which you cited above requires an expert, and I for one
wouldn't even think about taking such a case.

The best lawyer in medical malpractice was my erstwhile friend and
law school upper-classmate role model who, in addition to being a
top notch lawyer, was the assistant chief of OB-GYN at a major hospital
in suburban San Francisco. Bill died a number of years ago - the doctor
didn't take good enough care of his diabetes. A real tragedy.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

"Phil Kane" wrote:
On 17 Jul 2003 16:23:09 -0800, Floyd Davidson wrote:

I *still* wouldn't hire you to take care of something involving,
say, _medical_ _law_, or _Indian_ _law_, or _environmental_ _law_.
(Just some random examples because the lawyer I know best does
the first and has a degree in the last two.)

Actually, while I had my short private practice, I volunteered at
the County Free Legal Clinic and handled administrative law cases,
primarily landlord-tenant cases. Administrative law is, after all,
administrative law.... ggg

But you are right. Anything requiring the type of expertise in the
areas which you cited above requires an expert, and I for one
wouldn't even think about taking such a case.

That says it all right there too! You aren't about to take on
work that you aren't qualified to do.

The somewhat arbitrary reasons for picking those particular
areas were listed just in case you do happen to have some
experience there, because no doubt the "communications" field is
not your one and only ability. As you say, admin is admin.

The best lawyer in medical malpractice was my erstwhile friend and
law school upper-classmate role model who, in addition to being a
top notch lawyer, was the assistant chief of OB-GYN at a major hospital
in suburban San Francisco. Bill died a number of years ago - the doctor
didn't take good enough care of his diabetes. A real tragedy.

The lawyer I was referring to doesn't do medical malpractice. She
was general counsel for a tribal health provider, but is currently
the Executive VP. Which makes a great example, as I think *your*
career does too, of what is good about attorneys.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

"Phil Kane" wrote:
On 17 Jul 2003 16:23:09 -0800, Floyd Davidson wrote:

I *still* wouldn't hire you to take care of something involving,
say, _medical_ _law_, or _Indian_ _law_, or _environmental_ _law_.
(Just some random examples because the lawyer I know best does
the first and has a degree in the last two.)

Actually, while I had my short private practice, I volunteered at
the County Free Legal Clinic and handled administrative law cases,
primarily landlord-tenant cases. Administrative law is, after all,
administrative law.... ggg

But you are right. Anything requiring the type of expertise in the
areas which you cited above requires an expert, and I for one
wouldn't even think about taking such a case.

That says it all right there too! You aren't about to take on
work that you aren't qualified to do.

The somewhat arbitrary reasons for picking those particular
areas were listed just in case you do happen to have some
experience there, because no doubt the "communications" field is
not your one and only ability. As you say, admin is admin.

The best lawyer in medical malpractice was my erstwhile friend and
law school upper-classmate role model who, in addition to being a
top notch lawyer, was the assistant chief of OB-GYN at a major hospital
in suburban San Francisco. Bill died a number of years ago - the doctor
didn't take good enough care of his diabetes. A real tragedy.

The lawyer I was referring to doesn't do medical malpractice. She
was general counsel for a tribal health provider, but is currently
the Executive VP. Which makes a great example, as I think *your*
career does too, of what is good about attorneys.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 23:25:43 GMT, Robert Hawk belch-spoke these words:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:01:28 -0700, Dr. John
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:47:47 GMT, Robert Hawk belch-spoke these words:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 23:43:54 -0700, Dr. John
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 15:12:11 GMT, belch-spoke these words:

Well no, but I have been harmed by snakes, I mean lawyers. Can we get a
class action suit against lawyers? Lawyers have done more harm than
solder. So let's start with a class action against lawyers.

So many things wrong with that statement.... cant compute....errr. beep.

John

I think his statement is perfectly clear. All Lawyers are SELF
SERVING.. If we did not have these PARASITES chaseing
every AMBULANCE the Doctors may continue to practice..


I didn't say it was unclear, I said it was wrong. Suing lawyers if you are one is hypocrisy and if
you are not, is suicide.

All Lawyers ARE hypocrites AND they would be dooing us a favor
by taking the gas pipe.. Or as you put it "Suicide"

If one lawyer dared to sue another lawyer or a group of lawyers, all lawyers would jump on the side
of the defendant lawyer and pummel the plaintiff.


And I know PLENTY of lawyers that don't chase ambulances or doctors. What goddamn world are you
living in?

NOT Your world Where everybody has their head "up their ass"

Funny that you are projecting your own recto-cranial inversion on me.


Oh the High Classed MouthPiece who makes the rounds with the
sleazy Gumshoes, Kicking in motel room doors, thumping his Bible.
A class act for sure.. BFG

What? Nevermind.



John

Hey john, Are you one of them scumbag lawyers??

No, I'm one of those scumbag P.I.'s. Maybe I'll sue you one day for defamation of character. Is
there a statute of limitations on that?

John

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 23:25:43 GMT, Robert Hawk belch-spoke these words:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 16:01:28 -0700, Dr. John
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:47:47 GMT, Robert Hawk belch-spoke these words:

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 23:43:54 -0700, Dr. John
wrote:

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 15:12:11 GMT, belch-spoke these words:

Well no, but I have been harmed by snakes, I mean lawyers. Can we get a
class action suit against lawyers? Lawyers have done more harm than
solder. So let's start with a class action against lawyers.

So many things wrong with that statement.... cant compute....errr. beep.

John

I think his statement is perfectly clear. All Lawyers are SELF
SERVING.. If we did not have these PARASITES chaseing
every AMBULANCE the Doctors may continue to practice..


I didn't say it was unclear, I said it was wrong. Suing lawyers if you are one is hypocrisy and if
you are not, is suicide.

All Lawyers ARE hypocrites AND they would be dooing us a favor
by taking the gas pipe.. Or as you put it "Suicide"

If one lawyer dared to sue another lawyer or a group of lawyers, all lawyers would jump on the side
of the defendant lawyer and pummel the plaintiff.


And I know PLENTY of lawyers that don't chase ambulances or doctors. What goddamn world are you
living in?

NOT Your world Where everybody has their head "up their ass"

Funny that you are projecting your own recto-cranial inversion on me.


Oh the High Classed MouthPiece who makes the rounds with the
sleazy Gumshoes, Kicking in motel room doors, thumping his Bible.
A class act for sure.. BFG

What? Nevermind.



John

Hey john, Are you one of them scumbag lawyers??

No, I'm one of those scumbag P.I.'s. Maybe I'll sue you one day for defamation of character. Is
there a statute of limitations on that?

John

On 17 Jul 2003 15:53:00 -0800, Floyd Davidson wrote:
Sylvan Butler wrote:
In fact, dealing with a lawyer in the first place
is the best way to avoid having to deal with more lawyers later!

Because the lawyers have been too much involved in the law, and it
gets created and twisted so that only lawyers are allowed to
interpret it. If you try to skip that step, as you note, the lawyer
cartel is likely to come after you.

In fact lawyers *are* the only ones allowed to interpret it.
That is exactly what passing a Bar exam buys them.

Not true. Passing the bar is ONLY required to interpret the law for
someone else. And why is that? Because lawyers made it so. It's
nice to make the rules that prevent competition, and then have
someone else with big guns enforce your rules.

If I want a contract, or any other legal document, to actually
say what is necessary (as an example of when a lawyer is
useful), I'm certainly going to actually have a lawyer look at

And why do you feel that is necessary? Because other lawyers are
out there to twist and tangle what should be clear meaning.

Lawyers have taken over and stolen the law from the people it was
intended from the beginning to serve.

sdb
--
| Sylvan Butler | Not speaking for Hewlett-Packard | sbutler-boi.hp.com |
| Watch out for my e-mail address. Thank UCE. change ^ to @ |
It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his
cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our
own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval
of their consciences. -- C. S. Lewis

On 17 Jul 2003 15:53:00 -0800, Floyd Davidson wrote:
Sylvan Butler wrote:
In fact, dealing with a lawyer in the first place
is the best way to avoid having to deal with more lawyers later!

Because the lawyers have been too much involved in the law, and it
gets created and twisted so that only lawyers are allowed to
interpret it. If you try to skip that step, as you note, the lawyer
cartel is likely to come after you.

In fact lawyers *are* the only ones allowed to interpret it.
That is exactly what passing a Bar exam buys them.

Not true. Passing the bar is ONLY required to interpret the law for
someone else. And why is that? Because lawyers made it so. It's
nice to make the rules that prevent competition, and then have
someone else with big guns enforce your rules.

If I want a contract, or any other legal document, to actually
say what is necessary (as an example of when a lawyer is
useful), I'm certainly going to actually have a lawyer look at

And why do you feel that is necessary? Because other lawyers are
out there to twist and tangle what should be clear meaning.

Lawyers have taken over and stolen the law from the people it was
intended from the beginning to serve.

sdb
--
| Sylvan Butler | Not speaking for Hewlett-Packard | sbutler-boi.hp.com |
| Watch out for my e-mail address. Thank UCE. change ^ to @ |
It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his
cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our
own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval
of their consciences. -- C. S. Lewis

This is a long running thread. I'm going to filter now. Goodbye.

This is a long running thread. I'm going to filter now. Goodbye.