Here's a PH I would never hunt with!

Frivolous Lawsuit?

quote:

---

When a professional big-game hunter on safari in Africa shot a charging lion from about 30 yards away, he expected that the cat would die, or at least be stopped.

Instead, the lion mauled the marksman.

It wasn't bad aim, but bad bullets that allowed the lion to take Rolf Rohwer temporarily out of the hunting game, according to a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday against the bullet manufacturers, one of which is the Federal Cartridge Co. of Anoka.

Rohwer, of Scotland, is a wildlife biologist who has more than 30 years of African hunting and wildlife management experience, according to his Web site. He suffered permanent damage to his legs, arm and back, said his attorney, Louis Franecke. Rohwer was trying a new type of ammunition on Aug. 11, 2000, the day of the attack, he said.

"We think the company makes good ammunition, but not all of it is good for every application," Franecke said from his office in San Rafael, Calif. "Therein lies the problem. This bullet is not suitable for all big game."

Although the bullet might be good for hunting the majority of big game animals -- including rhinoceros, elephant, buffalo and hippopotamus -- the lion's thin skin allowed the bullet to pass through with minimal damage, he said. On a thicker-skinned animal, the bullet -- a .458 Winchester Magnum, 500 grain Trophy Bonded Bear Claw -- would expand, killing the animal quickly, according to the suit.

A lion shot with the bullet is still a dangerous and "harmful beast capable of causing severe personal injuries to human for a substantial period of time," the suit said.

Officials at Federal Cartridge hadn't seen the suit and were unable to comment on it, said Rod Bitz, spokesman for Alliant Techsystems Inc., Federal's parent company. The other company named is Trophy Bonded Bullets Inc. of Houston, according to the suit.

"This bullet is not suitable for killing a charging lion," Franecke said. "It's suitable for killing a lion over a period of time."

Before the lion reached Rohwer, who has since returned to hunting, he shot it a second time, Franecke said.

"The lion died basically while chewing on my client."

---

I think I saw something while watching CNN's coverage of the war in Iraq that might just have been the ticket on that charging lion. . I think this thing would have fallen into the kill instantly (it would have at least rearanged lion parts) instead of the kill eventually categery .

Chuck

P.S. the rocket propelled grenade...er um premium ammo I mean would probably be hard to come by and quite expensive.

[ 04-16-2003, 20:09: Message edited by: Chuck Nelson ]

George,

I would have thought a Bear Claw would be one of my favorite bullets to shoot a lion with.

In fact, I shot two with it.

And if this looser's argument is carried further, the Barnes X bullets should never be considered for lion at all.

I have shot 3 lions with it!

I am sure Federal can get testimony from many hunters who have used this bulle on lion very successfully.

Obviously he is not as good a "marksman" as he makes out to be!

I'm thinking he missed the class in PH school where they explained that only hits to the central nervous system stopped charges.

Perhaps he's never had a lion charge before?

George

Is lion hunting now called Non dangerous game hunting?

This is totally beyond belief.

I don't know if ATK (Alliant Tech Systems) is self-insured, or if they depend on their insurance company to defend these sorts of suits. In either case the beancounters may pay the guy something to settle and go away. I hope this one goes along and we get the gory details.

It will be interesting to learn all of the details of the hunt, as this guy is going to have to prove that everything he did was perfect -- and only the bullet's failure was involved. Obviously, he did not brain the lion on the first shot.

I guess he forgot to read the disclaimers!

His website has the head of a good lion on the front page; can you believe that!

http://www.rolfrohwersafaris.com/index.html

har de har har

jim dodd

[ 04-16-2003, 21:23: Message edited by: HunterJim ]

If I sued every time an animal I shot didn't immediately fall over dead I'd spend the rest of my life in court or being deposed, etc. I always thought a super tough bullet in 458 win mag was pretty effective on lion. Maybe Saeed should send in an affidavit for the defense to use.

My way of thinking about DG hunting is the fact that there is a chance that it can be quite dangerous! That's one of the biggest problems I have with our society today....people are sue crazy. Personally I think that the civil legal process should be similar to the criminal process. I think all lawsuits should go before an equivalent of a 'Grand Jury' who decides, based on all the information of the suit, if the suit has merit and should be pursued. It sure would get rid of ALOT of the 'BS' lawsuits! I'm not saying that this particular case is BS.....but it sure sounds like it from the limited info given.

Just My Opinion!

Is that a French attorney? Another neg. mark on the legal system & our French "allies".
Whatever happened to takeing responsability for ones OWN actions?

[ 04-16-2003, 23:32: Message edited by: fredj338 ]

Same old stuff. He screws up but wants to blame someone else.

I guess there are a few chicken-sh*t PH's too.

Will

Maybe that's why Serria doesn't recommend their match kings for game. They do not want to get sued because they work so well.

A typical selfish loser who won't take responsibility for his own actions, or failings. Put him on the list with smokers who sue tobacco companies, people who file fraudulent injury claims, and anyone else who wants something for nothing.

That guy is trash. I hope he gets all the publicity he deserves. It might be worth calling him up to book a hunt. Get a list of his satisfied clients then send them all a copy of the news article, and ask why they don't have more class than to hunt with such worthless scum.

If he wins everybody better get more insurance and raise your prices to cover yourself in case you run into one of these jerks.

Too bad the lion didn't finish him.

What a bunch of crap!!! Sure are a lot of lawsuit happy folks out there today...It will be the downfall of this country sooner or later...I know a booking agent that is getting sued because his client died in a commercial airline crash!! Booking Agents cannot get insurance coverage on such things, we cannot even get coverage on a hunt that goes bad when it is not our fault....

Both the PH and his attorney obviously have little understanding of either ballistics or the nervous system of a cat.

At trial I suggest that the defense shoot spooked live housecats with .458 ammo from every manufacturer. Those cats will run around and live a long time, regardless of who made the ammo.

[ 04-17-2003, 03:34: Message edited by: 500grains ]

This is a crock! I hope his business tanks!!

Bob

I just sent him this e-mail:

Mr. Rohwer,

You sir, are a disgrace to hunters, guides, and PH's everywhere. Your frivolous lawsuit will only aid in the effort to end hunting all together. I sincerely regret your injuries, but blaming them on a bullet, especially the Trophy Bonded Bear Claw, is absurd. As a PH, you should have thoroughly tested any bullet you use in the field on dangerous game. You should be ashamed of yourself. Obviously, you have lost any sense of personal responsibility. I hope word of your lawsuit spreads like wildfire, which it appears to be doing, and you never book another safari.

Sincerely,

Bob Connell
San Antonio, Texas
USA

[ 04-17-2003, 05:31: Message edited by: Bob in TX ]

The thing that scares me is that this was an outfitter and PH who was responsible for the safety of others; had it been the client who'd been hammered, whose fault would it have been, other than his?

George

Ray is right. The suit is a crock!

Any decent judge should dismiss it and order monetary sanctions against the PH AND the lawyer. I'd immediately depose the PH and ask this question: Before this incident, how many animals have you shot, or seen shot, hit elsewhere than the CNS, that traveled more than 30 yards before expiring? As soon as he answers what can only be "several hundred", a judge worth his salt would ask retorically, with no little anger, "Then why in the hell are we here?" and penalize the s.o.b.'s for cluttering up his court.

If the suit survives summary judgment, there may be an interesting conflict of laws problem. I'm not sure in what state and, even,
what country's law will apply. I doubt the lion chewed upon the PH's heart in America, and the laws of that other country could well control instead of whatever state in the U.S. as to "assumption of the risk", "contributory negligence", etc.

As our Sec. of State said this week, "Stuff Happens". Also, how is the PH going to prove where he hit the lion.. And, finally, this may be one of the only times that a Mark Sullivan tape is worth a crap for anything. There are dozens of examples on his tapes of large caliber bullets hitting lions, buffalos, etc. and the animals living for a long time. While a jury might want to puke when seeing the needless invitation to charges (as I did), there are some interesting moments when buffalo and hippo are hit in the head with tons of foot pounds of energy, only to keep on coming.

The PH is a whimp who bit off more than he could chew... which is not so bad.. we all occasionally do that, but he is denying that he should be responsible for his own mistake. And that's just plain wrong.

I just hope the assigned judge has some charactor.

After I posted this message, I re-read it and noticed my picture below. Now whose fault would it be if the stupid idiot in it had been stomped by the elephant in front of which he was showing off.... no one but me... and no matter if the elephant had been hit a dozen times with .700 N.E.'s in the brain and lived to smash me... I put my dumb ass there. It was fun and I got a thrill, but I paid the nickle, and I took the chance. Cool picture, though, huh?

[ 04-17-2003, 06:03: Message edited by: JudgeG ]

I think that you guys might be jumping the gun a bit here. Certain types of bullets are NOT suitable for back up on Lions or Leopards. They may be just fine for a first shot with a PH backing you up but will not work for close in work. I think that X bullets and Trophy Bonded fall into that class.

Granted, he should not have been 'experimenting' with a new bullet when someones life was at risk but bullets do fail at all the wrong times. Wait and see what happened.

Rolf has been around alot longer and shot alot more DG than anyone on this Forum and you should wait for the rest of the story.

Bye the way, a friend of mine, had a Lion Load in .577 from A-Square hit a charging Lion at 10 feet right in the jaw. The bullet ran down the outside of the jaw and out the cheek, never penitrating. The Lion turned and the second bullet hit it in the side of the head below the ear and penitrated the skin and ran around the skull. When the Lion scooted farther into the brush Kurt scooted out and grabbed another rifle. He then went back in and shot the Lion.

Upon investigation it was found that the entire box of factory A-Square ammunition had been loaded with only 20 or so grains fo powder.

caveat emptor

Mickey there is no end to the A-Square stories. I bought 500 A-Square brass that was soft and started to lock up in my gun at 2250 fps with a 600 grain bullet. This was part of a run of brass so you could imagine the poor guy that bought ammo loaded to 2475 from A-Square and headed off to Africa. Yahoo!! I don't think this guy has a case.
Take care,
Dave

All I know of the above case is what was reported in the news item, but ...

aroundabout 1994 the Zimbabwe PH Association was considering and may have done so, launching legal action against a US bullet manufacturer for repeated failure of its projectiles. Unfortunately I can't remember exactly the brand (can guess it though but won't). A number of PHs had close calls, or worse.

I believe in these instances the projectiles were breaking up and not holding together when shot into buffalo, elephant etc so the opposite to what appears to be the case above.

If a manufacturer advertises a projectile as being suitable for "X" game and also charges exhorbitant prices due to its "quality" they do need to stand by it.

Not saying at all that litigation is called for though but perhaps there is more to the above story and hopefully Mr Rohwer or someone who knows something about the case can tell us more.

PS .458 Win Mag 500 gr Trophy Bonded Bear Claw - what are the claims for this bullets performance on lion?

I hardly ever get into these, since the reported facts ALWAYS turn out to be different from the REAL facts, or situation.

Most news guys are out to sell newspapers, not report facts.

The assertions by the attorney are certainly intresting.

I remember reading a guy hit a buffalo with a 4 bore, heart and lung, IIRC, and it STILL went 60 yards. I bought a 375 after reading that.
Figured if the 4 bore wasn't a stopper, I couldn't fire anything from MY shoulder that was.

Sides, once you piss'em off, all bets are off, with both cats, buffalo, elephants, etc. Adrenalin is a beautiful thing.


Score one for the lions...

s

OK here is what the Federal site says

"Trophy Bonded Bear Claw This legendary Jack Carter design is ideal for medium to large dangerous game and is loaded exclusively by Federal. The jacket and core are 100% fusion-bonded for reliable bullet expansion from 25 yards to extreme ranges. The bullet retains 95% of its weight assuring deep penetration. The bullet jacket features a hard solid, copper base tapering to a soft, copper nose section for controlled expansion."

PS Regarding the legal action - when most PH's seem to load solids in their backup DG rifles I guess the expansion argument may be a little moot.

NitroX,

For dangerous cats, PH's always load softs as a back up, and recommend clients to use softs as well. You don't want overpenetration, you want shock and awe.

Pete

Gentlemen,

Of course, none of us knows what actually happens, so we are all speculating.

But, having hunted and shot a lot of dangerous game, I will ALWAYS take penetration over expansion. This is my own choice.

When an animal is heading your way, and you have only a few seconds to decide whether you prefer a trophy or a coffin, there is only one place to put that shot.

In the brain.

I am not talking out of experience, as I have been very lucky not have had any serious charges, but on the occasion when a lion is mock charging us once, both myself and my PH were within a second of pulling our triggers.

I had the head of that lion in the center of the scope, and my rifle was loaded with BEAR CLAWS!?

I had complete confidence in both the rifle and bullet, and in myself in placing the bullet in the right place.

If that did not happen, I would have had to live with my mistake.

Saeed wrote:

quote:

---

... live with my mistake.

---

Let's hope "live" is the proper verb... we like our host!


As to jumping to conclusions, perhaps I was a little quick, but if you look at the lawyers comments, he didn't say the bullet didn't work as designed, but rather it didn't work as advertised, in effect, being too tough for thin skinned game.

Regardless, my reference was to the fact that it doesn't make a bit of difference if you shoot a lion with a .22 or a .700 N.E., if you don't hit the spine/brain, you have a problem in a charge.

[ 04-17-2003, 16:37: Message edited by: JudgeG ]

Everyone should send him an e-mail to let him know what we think of his bullshit lawsuit. When you hunt dangerous game, you have to know that bad shit can happen. When they're coming for you, a CNS hit is the only guaranteed stopper.

Here's the e-mail I sent him yesterday:

quote:

---

I just read the story in the Star Tribune, and must say I am disgusted by the premise that an experienced, licensed PH is blaming his own poor choice of ammunition on a manufacturer who never made claims as to the 'stopping ability' of their loads.

While I am sure your injuries were significant, they will pale in comparison to the negative press among (and diminished bookings from) the community of big game hunters.

In four safaris, I never met any PHs who would blame anyone but themselves for a screw-up like yours.

Yours truly,
George Samaras

---

George

It's crap like this that makes me quick to tell people that I'm a "prosecutor" not a "lawyer". There are just too many people taking (or soliciting) cases like this one that I don't want to be associated with professionally. There is a serious lack of personal responsibility emerging in our culture. Tort reform is, in my opinion, one of the most important movements of our time.

Woodhits:
I'm shocked that as an attorney, you won't at least wait to read a factual account, or the pleading, before drawing an opinion.

The ONE thing that really struck home in my torts class was you can NEVER trust a press report, period,EVER!
EVERY case our teacher brought into class, from the paper, proved to be poorly reported, full of inaccurate statements, and omitting vital facts.
As a prosecuter, you should know better, since the prosecutorial arm of the law recieves more bad, or incorrect press then any area I can think of. Also, as a prosecuter, you should be more careful condeming your brethren. My understanding is that as a member of that office, one is held to a higher moral, and ethical standard, by law, then other areas of law.

I would not be shocked at all, that if when the facts come out, we find out the bullet blew up on the surface, and failed to penetrate, etc.

What if the bullet was defective?
What if the round had only 20 grains of powder in it, giving little velocity, and little hydrodynamic shock, and no penetration?

What if Federal, unknown to us, has been failing to follow safe reloading procedures, or manufacturing procedures, concerning their dangerous game loads? What if the attorney has
inside information we are not privy too, that indicates any of the above?

The beautiful part of the legal system is that tort suits, through discovery, bring to light, and keep large companies, that would otherwise be above the law, into the public spotlight, for better or worse, and the information becomes public record.

From my own experience reloading, I can say I would MUCH rather rely on my skill, and metering ability, and powder choices, then on factory ammunition.

I know that Saeed, reloading his own for his wildcat, and with his superb ability to hit a vital spot, is far better off then the average
hunter.

Let's wait and see about this situation, and find out what they in fact, plead, prior to rushing to judgement.

Briefly, I'll give a good example:

In LA, kids had been playing on a roof, and had fallen through the roof, into a classroom, injuring themselves.

It was reported that the children had snuck on to the roof, trying to rob the school of valuable equipment, and the thiefs had fallen in, and then turned around and sued.

The facts came out. The school roof was easily accessable, and the kids had been playing on it for months. The school district KNEW the kids played on it. The LA District failed to check it, or take any measure to prevent the children from getting on top of what was an old, rickety, and defective structure.

The children, playing on the roof, had fallen through the roof, and injured themselves. They were NOT thiefs.

What tort obligations did the school district fail
to fulfill to the students?

s
PS
I am in near complete agreement that solids, for game, are the only round for a stopping rifle, due to the need for straight, accurate, penetration.

However, for hunters like Saeed: I ask this question:

What if you are in a situation with a buffalo or lion, charging, and you have only Barnes X bullets
in your rifle? You have a round, like the BEAR CLAW, that is supposed to stay together.

The bullet is too hard, or brittle, falls apart, and fails. What are you going to do?

[ 04-18-2003, 05:13: Message edited by: Socrates ]

I checked the lawyer on the web, and found he handles construction defects. He is based in San Francisco, California. Why am I not surprised?

jim dodd

Socrates,

The news article related only the plaintiff's side of the case/story.
His claim is that because the TBBC did not 'stop' the lion instantly, it somehow failed.

Plaintiff's attorney said "the lion's thin skin allowed the bullet to pass through with minimal damage". If the bullet penetrated the lion's hide and passed through, that means the bullet was not properly placed.

Only a CNS hit will stop a charge. A TBBC to the CNS would have stopped this one. He knows that, I know that, and you probably know it, too.

George
P.S. Exactly where is 'American Athens'?

[ 04-18-2003, 05:48: Message edited by: GeorgeS ]

Hunting lions is dangerous business-period, could there be a million factual situations? Sure. Would I under ANY circumstances pursue monetary damages for a bullet failing to stop a CHARGING LION? Probably not. He may have a great case, just not my style. I do see a serious causation issue no matter what the factual scenario is though, who's to say that the lion would not have chewed him had the bullet performed perfectly? You're right about getting all of the facts before coming to a conclusion- it's just very difficult for me to imagine any fact pattern where a civil suit would be justified under my personal ethics (which are probably a bit extreme). At any rate I got a poor grade in torts.

It's stuff like this that has made me decide not to go to law school, and I was thinking Columbia or UVA. I just don't know if I could be part of a profession populated by such crummy folks.

Instead of law, I'm heading to accounting school next year. There might have been a few bad apples, but I think the CPAs are a better lot.

And yeah, I'm guessing a soft in the noggin is the proper way to account for a charging lion.

--QD

Hi all, in my humble opinion, if there was indeed a defect in the catridge or component, then the PH has every right to compensation.
If in fact, however, it turns out that bad bullet placement was what occurred, then no, he forfeits that right. However, it would seem to me, and bearing in mind I have never been to Africa so I am postulating, that a PH is, by nature and training, an expert in hunting large and dangerous game and therefore human error may not be as large a factor as equipment failure.
Just my supposition
AJ

If you're not willing to accept risk, stay home where its safe.

Paul

Socrates:

Remember that the PH's lawyer is quoted saying that the company made good ammunition, just that it wasn't good for this application. He was pretty clear in stating that the problem came from the bullet not expanding enough.... but who gives a flip... You piss off a lion and don't hit it in the CNS... bad stuff happens. The PH got paid for assuming that risk. And another point... If a lawyer is stupid enough to try his case in the press and he's misquoted, he also assumed the risk... and may have become a witness in the process.

Woodhits:
It appears that you have bought into propoganda of the "Princes of Darkness". There is no "insurance crisis". Some companies are in trouble because they planned on making 12 to 20% profit on their investments forever and with the stock market down, interest rates low, etc. they have decided to attempt to buy politicians and dupe their insureds. For example, I read in the Jacksonville paper yesterday about a group of doctors who have decided that they will stike until there is tort reform. Not one of those doctors took home less than 300K in salary and benefits last year. Whoopie... what's their problem? They want to make more money, I guess. I'll bet you a dollar to a dime that not one of those doctors has looked at a financial statment of an insurance company to see where the losses are coming from. And I'll bet you 10 dollars to a dime that they've been lobbied by their insuror to threaten the public with a stike so that politicians will wipe out the constitutional protections for their patients. And the poor doctors think it has to to with the company paying frivolous claims... poor guys... duped as badly as if they believed Bagdad Bob.

Florida has all kind of laws to stop frivolous law suits, particularly in malpractice cases.
The case must be vetted before it can even be filed to assure that it has merit. It cost about 75K to bring a very, very simple medical case. No lawyer is going to just file one on the chance he can "scare" an insuror into settling. Florida has laws and court rules that provide for payment of attorney's fees for frivolous suits (and that the Plantiff's attorney pay them in especially frivolous cases).. So, the protections are there already. We don't need more stripping of access to justice. Woodhits, if your judges are too lily-livered to grant sanctions, then run yourself... it's a great campaign idea, and I'll send you money, 'cause I believe in accountability... even for doctors and judges!

I well remember being interviewed years ago on CNN when the first "pain and suffering" cap was proposed. I asked a doctor who was also on t.v. with me, how much it would it be worth to him to sit all day, every day in a wheel chair while the doctor who put him there went water skiing at the beach. He stuttered a moment without answering. I then asked him how much he paid for his ocean front condo.. he said $450K... and then asked... what does that have to do with anything. I didn't have to answer to make my point.

Your "tort reform" solution to problems with the civil system deals only with symptoms, not with the basic cause. The AMA admits that 18% of people who die at hospitals are killed there by poor medical care. Where is the disgust and legislative uproar? ... I'll tell you where... the legislatures are in the insurance companies pockets, passing things like secret "peer review" which is nothing but a slap on the wrist, and absolutely bars a dead patients family's access to the testimony of other medical personel who saw and reported the malpractice.... In other words, a doctor can complain to the hospital about a bad doc... and can't tell the poor patient's family a word about it... the family has to figure it out themselves... I find that amazing... but insurance compaines got the laws passed to protect themselves from paying just verdicts. It's worse than that... a doctor can be disiplined for telling a prospective patient to avoid going to a bad doctor who is, for instance, under "hospital probation" for maiming or killing a patient! He must let the unsuspecting patient go and suffer the consequences... And we need tort reform????.... I think the problem lies elsewhere.

And you as a prosecutor... Have you ever wondered if you are unreasonably in awe of doctors? Have you ever prosecuted one who injured a patient because he had too much to drink the night before, or was abusing drugs??? Police check pawn shops to find who is selling stolen goods... Tell me the last time a cop checked what doctors sent too many patients to the graveyard. Read the AMA's own figures. More folks are killed by substance abusing doctors than by armed robbers, about 10 to 1. Where is your outrage? Oh, yeah... I forgot, you want MORE protection for bad doctors. Please tell me why?

Before you get too p.o.'ed, I believe that most doctors are just trying to do their job well. They are for reasons unknown, however, terrified in standing up to their malpracticing "peers". Still, like most attorneys, the vast majority of physicians are really great folks, dedicated to their oath, money being secondary, if even that... but most doctors, have truely been duped by their insurors, thinking that malpractice claims actually have something to do with rising rates... when the REAL problems are the stock market and doctor's own pansy-ass self policing.

Am I making this up... you judge.... I was at the state legislature when MAG Mutual, a Georgia insuror, was screaming for tort reform. I asked and found that they had NEVER had to pay a malpractice verdict... and no doctor had ever made that inquiry, yet were screaming that their rates were too high because of runaway juries... and 400 of them were camped out on the capital steps... driven in buses paid for by MAG Mutual.... awaiting a MAG Mutual cocktail party with the politicians who got campaign contributions from MAG.... And everyone of those well-educated men and women not knowing doo-doo about why they were there, except what they were told...Folks, that's being duped.

Hey... if you don't like what juries do... then don't think anyone is too good to be on one. Ask around in your neighborhood who is willing to do their duty, and who tries to avoid it... and then complains about "spilled coffee verdict in the McDonalds case". Call your registrar and sign up if you need to... don't foist it off on the great unwashed. Lawyers only have limited strikes... if educated folk don't avoid duty, some surely will be empaneled.. and it doesn't take but one strong voice to bring reason to a verdict.

Let's not destroy our constitutional rights with the insurance industry's money-making scheme. Let's make judges do their duty to remitter or throw out bad verdicts, award sanctions, attorney's fees and not excuse "important" people from juries.

Again... I challenge you to run for a judgeship on that platform.... I'll support your candidacy... and I'll bet my bottom dollar that insurance companies will support your competition!

Why you, as a lawyer want to take another bite out of our constitutional rights because you think people are too stupid to judge their peers, I don't understand... I just haven't become that smart myself, I guess.

[ 04-18-2003, 07:39: Message edited by: JudgeG ]

Judge: Again, what lawyers put in the paper, and what they plead are two different things, often, as I am SURE you know. In particular, Plaintiff's lawyers.

As for tort reform, you put it well.

I'm currently recovering from nearly being killed by a doctor's bad judgement. He operated on my foot. Three weeks later I had abnormal swelling.
Thought it might be an infection. He said it didn't look like an infection, but, that I was fine, and go out and work out and proceed with rehab.

After following those directions, giving a lecture that night at a law school,I ended up with a right leg twice the size of my left, and blood clots in my lungs. I spent a week in the hospital, and my life has been a stress related mess ever since.

Better then 6 months later, my right leg is still discolored, and, the vein valves have not recovered, creating blood pooling in the leg.

Such hospital visits have statistical probability
of shortening my life, and,the ONLY likely cause of the swelling was blood clots or infection, and, he had ruled out infection. ALL he had to do was have an ultra-sound on the leg, but he didn't.

His poor judgement came extremely close to killing me. When blood clots reach your lungs...

Why? He takes so many cases, in search of wealth, that I believe it impairs his judgement.

I believe this is common with Doctors, in particular, surgeons, and the Judge has stated my opinion is well based in facts.

Woodhits: You need to have my life for the last 6 months, financially ruined, working 7 days a week, 9 shifts a week, starting in November, and not stopping, combined with constant therapy, living on 2400 mg of ibuprofen a day,and perhaps that might change your mind about law suits, and the torts system.

s

From the California Bar Association:
"Louis Stanton Franecke
Membership Info
CA Bar Number 52386
Current Status Active � explanation of "Active" status
CA Admission Date June 2, 1972
District District 4
County Marin
Contact Info
Address Franecke Law Group
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXX CA XXXXXX
Phone Number (XXXXX
Fax Number (XXXXXX
e-mail XXXXXXXXX
Education Info
Undergraduate School Univ of Arizona; Tucson AZ
Law School Univ of Arizona COL; Tucson AZ
Remarks

This member has no public record of discipline.

Copies of official attorney discipline records are available upon request. "

This man has been a member of the Califorina bar since 1972, with no record of discipline.
That is a record to be proud of.

Perhaps putting a face to the man would curb
the remarks...Please do not bother him with questions, comments, etc.

I post this because if he was a terrible attorney, he would have a page long record of
discipline by the bar.

JudgeG said:
"Why you, as a lawyer want to take another bite out of our constitutional rights because you think people are too stupid to judge their peers, I don't understand... I just haven't become that smart myself, I guess."

Having worked in a DA's office for a bit, I can say the usual reason is resentment. Prosecutors resent attorney's that make WAY more money then they do, and, that protect bad guys.
Too bad the prosectors can't go after the real bad guys, the corporate heads making 130 million a year, stealing and raping the companies they control for every dime they can get their hands on.

I did find that most criminal cases didn't go to trial unless we had a VERY good case.

Since the office was in the liberal center of the world, and the juries returned 48% conviction rates(I'm sure the worst in the United States, even prosecuting only slam dunk cases), the DA's wanted to only file excellent cases, as they should. I believe that criminal law tends to make one see things in black and white, since it's SO obvious who the real bad guys are.
Having worked on cases from homeless assault, to attempted murder, it WAS really black and white.

I believe that view of life is carried over into more complex areas, and a rush to judgement is not an unreasonable charcteristic for a DA, in particular, the younger ones.

S

s

[ 04-18-2003, 11:00: Message edited by: Socrates ]

Sorry to have created a med-mal shitstorm on the board- I really wasn't referring to medical malpractice or the "insurance crisis' at all. My pet gripe is large products liability suits like those being brought against the tobacco companies. Luckily the firearms industry has been more sucessfull in defending against these actions, but at a tremendous expense. I'm not for limiting anyone's rights- I do however believe that when you chain smoke or shoot lions, you know what you are getting into.