So, I was serving as an arbitrator in a case. Essentially, I am like a judge--I hear the case and make a decision.
The Plaintiff was injured in a car accident. His lawyer asked him this: "What has been the effect on your life from this accident and the injuries that you suffered."
The Plaintiff answered: "It has turned my life around 380 degrees."

380 Degrees? Huh?
This is what makes the practice of law the great sport it is.

People are great. What's 20 degrees. At least he was in the ballpark.

A story I always found entertaining. A good friends grandfather got into an accident with an 18 Wheeler. (Slow speeds. No one got hurt)
The officer asked him how he couldn't see the semi and he claimed it was in his blind spot.

I laughed for a week.

quote:

380 Degrees? Huh?

Well, at least you know he wasn't coached...or, maybe he was?

I was involved in an automobile accident in which my car was spun around 1350°. irwin was my attorney.

The case mever made it to court.

Nuff said....

PH

quote:

Originally posted by irwin:
So, I was serving as an arbitrator in a case. Essentially, I am like a judge--I hear the case and make a decision.
The Plaintiff was injured in a car accident. His lawyer asked him this: "What has been the effect on your life from this accident and the injuries that you suffered."
The Plaintiff answered: "It has turned my life around 380 degrees."

380 Degrees? Huh?
This is what makes the practice of law the great sport it is.

But even if it had been 360 wouldn't that mean he was right back to where he started? Nothing had changed? Now 180 degrees. Sorry, just a pet peeve of mine.

380 degrees...That's no pocket change.

How can the plaintiff say with 100% certainty that it was 380 degrees, and not..say...379 degrees or even 382 degrees. Did he have a protractor with him?

My client's life was turned 180 degrees, then another 180 degrees, and then someone nudged him another 20 degrees and that's the direction this case is taking.

I am guessing he meant 180 degrees. Kind of a malapropism, if that is the right word.

He didn't impress me as the kind of guy who has ever touched a protractor, or any instrument any more technical than a crayon.

quote:

Originally posted by irwin:
The Plaintiff answered: "It has turned my life around 380 degrees."

380 Degrees? Huh?
This is what makes the practice of law the great sport it is.

I get it. He is 20 degrees beyond where he started.

Irwin,
If you're a plaintiff's lawyer, I know for a fact that you have stories that are more amusing than that! I just got a call from a guy who wants to sue b/c he has pain all the time. I asked from what. He said if he knew from what, he wouldn't have to call me now would he! Some of these people are unreal (watch - their on this froum too!)

zblang:
I do about 80% plaintiff's work, and 20% defense work.
I have many unbelievable stories.

Like the time I asked a person "Since the time of the accident, have you traveled outside the State of Maryland?"
The witness, a 25 year old person, said, "Is Virginia outside the State of Maryland?"

Or the time I asked someone, "Have you ever had your IQ tested?" She replied, "Yes".
So, I asked, "And, what were the results of the test?"
She said, "I was told that I did not need glasses."

quote:

Originally posted by irwin:
Or the time I asked someone, "Have you ever had your IQ tested?" She replied, "Yes".
So, I asked, "And, what were the results of the test?"
She said, "I was told that I did not need glasses."

Too funny...offer her some Riedel glasses, and she'll probably tell you she only needs glasses for driving, not for reading.

You know that really is amusing. I know what he meant but I wonder what implications his miscommunication had on the case.

Clearly, he was so affected by the accident that it threw his sense of spacial dimension and proportion out of whack. Sly move by Plaintiff's attorney to elicit this demonstration. I would have objected on the grounds that such a gratuitous display of befuddlement is overly prejudicial to the defense.

quote:

You know that really is amusing. I know what he meant but I wonder what implications his miscommunication had on the case.

I was the judge, essentially, in the case. His statement had no effect. It proved that he was not a well-spoken fellow, and perhaps kind of dumb. There was other substantial proof of that as well. But, dumb people can be injured just as badly as smart people. In fact, a physical injury (he had a rotator cuff tear) is perhaps more problematic in a guy like him, who works a construction job, and needs his body to earn a living, than someone who sits at a desk all day thinking and talking for a living.

This is a serious problem in our society. Dumb people get dusty jobs and get injured left and right, slipping on disability for the rest of their lives as soon as that 2X4 beam cathes their forehead. Instead of taking that path, they should be given desk jobs from the get go and prevented from operating heavy machinery. And all the papper pushers and other lazy shysters need to be booted out and onto construction site, where cement flows like rivers and nailguns are abundant.
Fixin' the 'conomy, one person at a time.