Re: (Mostly off-topic) Fallout and PTSD and Contingency Fees

[BLHamrick@AOL.COM]

In a message dated Sun, 10 Mar 2002 10:19:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, RuthWeiner writes:



> In a message dated 3/9/02 4:57:46 PM Mountain Standard Time, lavelyp@UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU writes:

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 1 Can you prove TMI (or something/someone associated with the accident) caused the PTSD? If no, end. If yes go to 2.

> 

> 2 Can you show that the behavior was negligent or intentional? If no, end. If yes go to 3.

> 

> 3 Can you show that the conduct was outrageous and shocked the senses? If no, end. If yes go to 4.

> 

> 4 Can you fashion an appropriate remedy? If no, end. If yes go to 5.

> 

> 5 Do you think that you can find a jury who will agree with each of the above AND will give a judgement that would make taking the case worthwhile?

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Again, mostly off-topic. I just finished my very first service on a jury (a criminal, not a civil case as this one would be) and I learned a lot. The relevant thing I learned is that the ENTIRE burden of any proof is on the plaintiff, at least in a criminal case. So the plaintiff would have to prove 1 through 4 beyond a reasonable doubt.>>



Not to nitpick...er...well to nitpick a little...In a civil case the standard would be to prove 1 through 4 with a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., anything over 50% will do), and the jury (in California, at least...I'm not sure what other states do) does not have to be unanimous in their verdict, making it not nearly so difficult to get big, huge $$$$$$$$$$$$$ for plaintiff.







Barbara L. Hamrick

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/