CPCSupport:Mesothelioma attorney watch: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
There have been criticisms in the past about these firms taking liberties on asbestos litigation... | There have been criticisms in the past about these firms taking liberties on asbestos litigation... | ||
but in the context of the above, it's a problem of ''both'' contingency, and the United States' capitalism. | ...but in the context of the above, it's a problem of ''both'' contingency, and the United States' capitalism. Despite contingency incentivizing bending moral boundaries for a buck, eliminating contingency may well cause more problems than it solves, as it would lock the poor out of the legal system completely. Despite the obvious systemic problem, litigation is no-doubt heavy-handed. Use this if the case is obvious, or no other option is available (like what's happening politically right now). | ||
Vagaries aside, if you ''are'' infected, however unlikely it is, or if you're just curious, here are some things we know, however ''unhelpful'' it may be... | Vagaries aside, if you ''are'' infected, however unlikely it is, or if you're just curious, here are some things we know, however ''unhelpful'' it may be... | ||
Revision as of 03:22, 18 December 2024
Is it worth calling them?
Faulty PPE + Asbestos = Lawsuits and lawyers knowledgeable on respirators. Presumably. But honestly, I don't know.
Still, it might worth tracking their work, especially given that certain incoming, reactionary health administrators are in contact with law firms who have sued certain pharmaceutical companies on... questionable grounds.
That being said, most of us do not have time, money, motivation, or need to contact a lawyer, unless one were to say, get infected while seeking health care by someone wearing a surgical mask (of all things... please wear a surgical N95) known to be wrong since 1980. But surely that's rare, right?
So... feel free to add to this list. Just make sure the firm actually works on mesothelioma, and aren't just there for the referral fee. Needless to say, fee'd commercials for mesothelioma are probably out there, which is why you should contact your state's bar association first.
The dark side
Most of these firms operate on contingency. Also in the US, judges are elected, and can have their campaigns funded by law firms. You... can see where this leads.
There have been criticisms in the past about these firms taking liberties on asbestos litigation...
...but in the context of the above, it's a problem of both contingency, and the United States' capitalism. Despite contingency incentivizing bending moral boundaries for a buck, eliminating contingency may well cause more problems than it solves, as it would lock the poor out of the legal system completely. Despite the obvious systemic problem, litigation is no-doubt heavy-handed. Use this if the case is obvious, or no other option is available (like what's happening politically right now).
Vagaries aside, if you are infected, however unlikely it is, or if you're just curious, here are some things we know, however unhelpful it may be...
Baron & Budd
Work
- Submitted (and stamped) this NIOSH document in court.
- Found this case from a Google search, which brought up a few more firms with considerably less flashy marketing:
Foster & Sear
Provost Umphrey
Brayton Purcell
Baron & Blue
- Official site
- Founded by Baron part of Baron & Budd.
Affiliates of mesothelioma.com
Cooney & Conway
Fediverse threads
- Fedia.io
- Discuss.online
- If you are on Mastodon, just copy either of the links above to your home feed's search bar, and then press enter.