Charlotte Observer:John Edwards cases were hardly frivolus

[surfermaw]

Mr. Moderator, I know this article shouldn't be here,but I think you will agree with me every one should John Edwards' cases were hardly frivolous



In response to "Should Kerry pick Edwards for VP slot? (March 9 Viewpoint):Eric Peters distorts John Edwards' legal career. Not only was Mr. Edwards not a class action lawyer, but also not one judge or jury ever considered his clients frivolous.

Was Bailey Griffin frivolous for being born brain-damaged with cerebral palsy? Was it frivolous that the best defense to her claim of medical negligence was that she was genetically predisposed to cerebral palsy? Was it frivolous to learn Bailey suffered a skull fracture and lack of oxygen during her birth? Was it frivolous to learn that a prompt C-section delivery might have prevented Bailey's life of suffering?

During a six-week trial Mr. Edwards not only presented facts that persuaded a Mecklenburg County judge and jury that Bailey's claim had merit, he persuaded me.

I should know whether the claim was frivolous or not -- I was the lawyer who represented the defendant.

Paul R. Dickinson Jr.


Charlotte

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/opinion/8176579.htm

[trotsky]

1. That darn near gave me goosebumps.

If the Republicans had half the moral fiber John Edwards has in his pinky...

[AP]

2. Beautiful.

[Maccagirl]

3. There is steel under that friendly/open persona

We should consider ourselves fortunate to have Mr. Edwards on our side. If his future isn't incredibly bright, we only have ourselves to blame.

[Kagemusha]

4. Is he saying he didn't defend his client hard because of

personal conviction that his client was in the wrong?

Isn't admitting that, like, grounds for license revocation?

[surfermaw]

5. I think he said he made him believe

Quiet a difference from what you try to suggest.

[AP]

6. Huh? He's saying that the plaintiff had a case that wasn't frivolous.

And it looks like he's using evidence that the jury found to be true to make his argument that it wasn't a frivolous case.

A lawyer doesn't have a duty to his client to deny facts found found by the jury long after the case was decided.

Facts are facts. It's not unethical to acknowledge them retrospectively, even if they suggest your client was liable.

[The Zanti Regent]

7. This is why we need President Kerry to appoint Chief Justice Edwards

We need a man who will stand up to Fat Tony and Slappy Thomas!