Wal-Mart fights back

Page 2 of 7  


And if you consider benefits, and inability to layoff easily if you over-hired, it might be cheaper to augment the staff with contracted attorneys. In any case the legal work is a planned, budgeted, known expense for a company like wal-mart. But having to pay suits is not.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Finally, someone else in this group with a brain.
It doesn't matter if they're hired guns or in-house staff, the decision to litigate has its cost/benefit tradeoff. Which to use is purely a long-term economic issue. WalMart didn't make the decision to litigate because they have free labor.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

In house legal staff dramaticaly lowers the costs of this sort of thing. A non-lawyer paralegal secretary does 99% of the work. Things like slip& fall cases are so routine, the paperwork and filings are mostly boilerplate. The paralegal asks the supervisor, "should we use defense #a3c on this, or #ac7?
Meanwhile the plaintiff, who is of MUCH more limited means must hire a lawyer at retail.
The corporation lawyers often use that as the only leverage needed to make a case go away. They simply keep delaying progress in the case by filing extensions, which cost them relatively nothing, while it makes the plaintiff run out of money to pay THEIR lawyer. A case can be strung along for YEARS this way.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Meanwhile (at Wal Mart), they're spending most of their time doing their real job: Handling boring stuff like real estate acquisitions, leasing (to other retailers on the properties where WM is the anchor store), etc.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jul 21, 8:14 am, snipped-for-privacy@mickymall.com wrote:

Ah, I see. Out-house legal staffs aren't allowed to use paralegals.

You mean, like the US government? ...which BTW, is the subject here.

Another one who thinks employees are free.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Ah, I see. Out-house legal staffs aren't allowed to use paralegals.

You mean, like the US government? ...which BTW, is the subject here.

Another one who thinks employees are free. =============
He did not even remotely imply that employees are free. Not even if you squint and wish really hard.
Would it help if we just said "OK, you win."?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

They can, and do, however they can also bill the paralegal's time at the same rate as the rate of the lawyer whose name is on the file. The plaintaiff pays that inflated amount.
What costs Walmart $20-$30 an hour, costs the plaintiff $400 an hour.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

17% of the lawyer's "billable hours" (lingo for their working time) of the in-house staff counsel at the Dept. of Labor - New York Office - OHSA Division are being dedicated to this one case... They are not "underemployed" as they would otherwise be dealing with multitudes of more simple cases if they were not engaged in the effort to defend their agencies position on the Walmart matter...
If you think that is odd, you have no idea how many man hours and tax dollars go into presenting some criminal cases... Two or three Assistant District Attorneys prepping a case where millions of dollars have been spent to get it this far with investigation time, evidence gathering, lab processing of the evidence and obtaining expert witnesses to provide testimony... That all adds up very quickly...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wrong.
...and your point is?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Evidently you do not own a business that has been sued.
I'm glad someone has the resources and courage to stop some of the crap that goes on every day with illegitimate claims.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/20/10 10:35 pm, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

When I was on vacation in New Zealand about 40 years ago I was surprised to find that they had a universal accident insurance program that even covered visitors. There was a standard list of compensation amounts to be paid for lost wages, loss of limbs, loss of sight in one (or both) eyes, etc., etc. No lawsuits for half the things that end up in US courts. An American lawyer on my tour bus thought it was a terrible system.
Perce
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/20/2010 9:45 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

When we were kids, the schools handed out some kind of insurance forms that listed all sorts of injuries and the amount of money that would be paid out for them. There where little boys talking to friends asking them to break an arm for them so they could get money for that new bike they wanted.
TDD
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, but I've dealt with "a business" and been screwed!
....and more times than I've sued, which is none all.
nb
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
notbob wrote:

Well said. A lot of businesses push the envelope under the assumption (usually true) that people will just grin and bear it.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, but I've dealt with "a business" and been screwed!
....and more times than I've sued, which is none all.
nb
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

Who says it's an illegitimate claim? Or have you prejudged (as in prejudice) it?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote

I'm not talking about any one particular claim, but I've seen many over the years. I've been involved in defending them for companies I've worked for and I know people that have made them. Sure, there are some where a business really is negligent, but there are many more that are not. Same with Workman's Comp, SS disability etc.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And the frivolous and/or fraudulant claims will keep being filed until such time as the losing side has to pay the legal fees of the winners. Now it is a gold mine for sleaze lawyers. File any lawsuit and they have nothing to lose. Lose the case? Big deal, they are out some billable hours. Win and you win big.
One of the biggest legal scams going is the 'class action suit' Only the lawyeers make out with the judgements, the plaintiffs get pittances.
Harry K
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And the frivolous and/or fraudulant claims will keep being filed until such time as the losing side has to pay the legal fees of the winners. Now it is a gold mine for sleaze lawyers.
*********************************************
That is sometimes done for divorce, support type cases. Varies by state.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I think it's pretty hard to find a lawyer who will take on a suit that has no merit, particularly for a percentage, and most people won't put their own money into legal fees unless they think they have a real cause of action.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.