Today’s Stories

  • Study Finds Trend Toward Jury Trials Yielding Larger Patent Verdicts. I read this title with interest until I realized it said “patent” not “patient”. Little different.
  • The Drug and Device Law Blog suggests that campaign contributions might sway a Pennsylvania intermediate appeals court. Thankfully, the authors’ law firm, Dechert, does not practice in Pennsylvania. Wait! What?
  • Overlawyered puts up links every day. At this time, I would like to formally accuse Walter Olson of having an intern or something.
  • There is a judge in Kansas who was appointed by JFK who is 103 years-old. That is just plain impressive. Above the Law is reporting older judges as a problem. But I’m too busy being impressed. 103.
  • Plaintiff’s lawyers release a salacious videotaped deposition from an alleged whistleblower in a hospital wound care lawsuit. I’d be more impressed with actual evidence of negligence. If I had a quarter for every disgruntled employee who claims to have warned of the impending doom…I’d rather focus on evidence of the impending doom, not the person who said I saw it coming for years. Florida found flaws in the hospital’s wound-care program so there may well be evidence. But this ex-employee’s testimony is not it (at least based on this story).

  • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data from 2000 to 2009 found that nearly 80 people a year are killed in alcohol-related crashes on New Year’s Day. Seriously, take the next 347 days and plan a neighborhood only New Year’s Eve party.
  • Eric Turkewitz does not like Avvo’s lawyer rating system, arguing that it is a rating system for self-promoting lawyers. Please don’t tell Eric I have a perfect score on Avvo. I agree with Eric that all of these awards/recognitions are a little silly and are not exactly based on who really is a good lawyer. But, honestly, it is all kinda nonsense, all the way up to the Nobel Peace Prize. So I’m not ashamed to play along with Avvo, particularly because I’m sure potential clients and referring lawyers see it. Avvo also ranks traffic on lawyer related blogs which has Eric’s blog ranked 4 place ahead of the Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog. This ranking to me is the same: very cool but ultimately meaningless.
  • Connecticut gets its malpractice database for the public back in order.
Posted in:
  • Turk

    So I’m not ashamed to play along with Avvo.

    Nice! You got your employees to endorse you. That’s got to be worth a few points.

    And the “invited member” to Million Dollar Advocates Forum was a nice touch.

    I’m thinking of further gaming the system by adding my bog posts that trash of Avvo as “publications.” It just seems like the right thing to do.

  • Ron Miller

    Eric, buddy, remember the rule about people in glass houses. You mock SuperLawyers on your blog but it shows up in the FIRST PARAGRAPH of your website.

    I have endorsed a ton of people on Avvo, most unsolicited. Yeah, I threw in our lawyers too. Should we exclude each other? We all did that.

  • Turk

    Eric, buddy, remember the rule about people in glass houses. You mock SuperLawyers on your blog but it shows up in the FIRST PARAGRAPH of your website.

    Ahh, but did you see where the link takes you? To my blog where I discuss the very issue of SuperLawyers and my thoughts about it.

    The objective is to inform the consumer that sometimes awards may not be all they are cracked up to be.

    By the way, don’t take the snark as directed at you, but at Avvo. I just don’t think there is any way that a lawyer can be rated in such a fashion.

  • Ron Miller

    I’m not entirely sure you can expect consumers to click though the link to get to your thoughts. I assumed it was a link to SuperLawyers and I would think every consumer would too. That is pretty subtle notice.

    You have accomplished a lot as a lawyer. (There is a reason we refer cases to you.) If you are putting SuperLawyers in the first paragraph, I’m assuming as a consumer it is a pretty big deal.

    I think fundamentally we are doing the same thing. You are mocking (a little) my play along comment but you are too right? You claimed your profile, put in a picture, and put down your publications and verdicts. When we both did that, we thought the whole thing was a little silly but we figured what the heck.

    I don’t take it as a snark. We agree on most everything but I think we can disagree on things too. I think both of our blogs are based on the idea of giving real opinions as opposed to be Stepford lawyers.

    The reality is that everyone plays along some. I’ll say this: you may less than I do. Our blogs are a perfect example. I use my blog to provide real information as your does. But unlike you, I’ll throw out a “Hey, we take these kinds of cases” post or link back to a keyword that I think is useful for the search engines to our website.

  • Are you insinuating that Dechert makes campaign contributions and tries to influence Pennsylvania judges? Because that is just utterly, totally, completely true, and I for one am outraged you would write something true about someone being hypocritical.

    On Avvo and SuperLawyers (I’m a 7 on Avvo and a “Rising Star”), I think we’re all uncomfortable with them since the methodology is poor, but, at the same time, they’re not wholly bogus — the way that, say, a dreck blog is bogus, or a false claim about results is bogus — and so we use them at arm’s length.

    It’s a rough and tumble world for PI/medmal lawyers, filled with unscrupulous competition. I wish I could sit back, contemplate the meaning of life and law, and enjoy a steady stream of clients, but we all need to do a little self-promotion here and there.

Contact Information