9312Re: [Attorney-InformationExchange] Need your thoughts on this: permanent injury
- Jan 31, 2006In a message dated 1/31/2006 6:39:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Plaintiff went to an attorney who gave him some names of doctors in the area
– he chose one.
Any thoughts of what I can ask to remove jurors for cause who in voir dire
admit they lean to finding no permanency unless the person is physically
disabled or there are objective signs of injury?
You have a guy who was rear-ended and felt fine at the scene. He never went
to see any doctor - he went to see an attorney who sent him to a doctor on
Now he claims subjective pain with nothing objective to support it, unless
you find Dr. Prostitute credible.
I wouldn't worry about "permanent;" unless, of course, you managed to get
this filed in East St. Louis (Notorious capital of ridiculous verdicts). If you
hope to collect a dime, I'd worry about paneling a jury where none of them
has a clue how the system works.
My verdict for Plaintiff would be a very round number.
Bill E. Branscum, Investigator
PO Box 10728
Naples, FL 34101
(239) 304-1640 Fax
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]