for those who care to learn about Edwards legal career

[LSK]

A great starting point is always Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_edwards

He wrote a book about 4 of his biggest trials:
http://www.amazon.com/Four-Trials-John-Edwards/dp/0743272048/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196272876&sr=1-18

Here is an excellent article from 2001 on his career:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html

No we he was not an "ambulance chaser":

"By sheer virtue of his skill as a lawyer, Edwards had been able to avoid taking the kinds of cases the public detests. During the campaign, opponents tried unsuccessfully to criticize him for turning away 35 to 40 cases for each one he accepted. But such was the demand for his service that it was impossible to accommodate everyone. Even so, a close friend and fellow attorney says that, before running for Senate, Edwards had a team of doctors and nurses privately screen his record to make sure that no case he'd brought to trial could be considered frivolous: "When they got significantly into , they decided he'd never come close to violating the standard.""

Here is a website devoted to Edwards biggest case involving the little girl who had half of her intestines sucked out by a swimming pool drain:
http://www.monkeytime.org/lakey.html

One more:
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2004/07/lets-make-war-on-trial-lawyers-who.html

Let me also remind you that George Bush made Tort Reform a priority when he was Governor of Texas and Corporations hate getting sued.

I have been seeing more and more of the GOP smear tactic of calling Edwards an "Ambulance Chaser" and I find it insulting to see such ignorance on DU.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

1. My biggest criticism of Edwards is that he not only voted “yes” to the IWR,

...he co-sponsored it, and then admitted to never reading it.

[Adelante]

10. He read the IWR he co-sponsored

He didn't read the National Intelligence Estimate his own Senate committee ordered produced, which contained information he could have known undermining Bush's case for war. Had he read it, he might have withdrawn his support for the war. Wouldn't that have been something? He failed in his responsibility to the American people. His law career has nothing to do with my not supporting him. It's all about the blood.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

19. During one of the first debates he said he didn't read the IWR. ...n/t

[Adelante]

20. That is shocking

I didn't know that.

[JI7]

27. during which debate and do you have a link to it ?

[quinnox]

2. Edwards got immensely wealthy from his legal career

Thats fact, but Edwardarians will of course say he did it all for the good of mankind. :eyes:

[Mythsaje]

4. Wealthy helping people get back at powerful corporations?

Oh, the humanity.

[Beaverhausen]

5. So, it's a bad thing to try to make money?

Do you get paid for the work you do?

[LSK]

7. at the expense of Corporations, yes

:eyes:

[LSK]

6. those links posted are specifically for you

You would be well served to read them.

[asdjrocky]

13. You my friend,

Are another person that has become a joke to me today.

[dave123williams]

26. Clearly, you don't know anybody who practices personal injury law.

They're not in it for the money. They're in it to stop the guys who think they can get away with it.

They're in it for Justice.

They take cases on contingency, almost always. If they lose, they get nothing. They're the last hope for people who have been grievously injured by fucks that think they're above the law, and try hit them in the one place they can still feel pain and regret - the wallet.

So, tell us all again how he's not a good man. How he's just in it for the money.

You want to know what guys like Edwards are all about? Go rent a movie called "The Rainmaker".

Your post just pushed me towards sealing my primary vote for Edwards. Still not sure about the general election, but thanks.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

28. Whether Edwards was in it for the money

isn't for me to decide.

HOWEVER, the generic "they're not in it for the money" is silly. Plenty of personal injury lawyers are in it for the money - all the lowlifes who advertise on tv for starters. Instead of buying a lottery ticket, they work hard in hopes of winning the lottery via a jury. ;)

My neighbor practices personal injury law. Several years ago he decided that he could no longer practice law the way he had been practicing. He couldn't live with his conscience. He now takes fewer cases, and now makes a very good income, but just a fraction of what he made before (or he wouldn't be my neighbor. LOL)

By the way, I have nothing wrong with practicing law and making a lot of money if it's done ethically. But "the law" and "ethics" aren't synonymous.

[dave123williams]

30. Your friend still practices personal injury law, right?

And now he's doing it the way it's *supposed* to be done. And for the record:

The Law: noun: a rule or body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society.

Ethics: noun: the philosophical study of moral values and rules, motivation based on ideas of right and wrong.

The law says don't kill people. Ethics says *why* you shouldn't.

You're under the mistaken impression that advertising on television is unethical, or that people who do it are. You're wrong on both counts.

Your comparison of somebody who a) got their undergraduate degree b) got their law degree and c) decided to use that degree in the furtherance of justice for the poor and wounded instead of taking the easy route towards going after money and power (certainly available to anyone with a law degree)....your comparison of that kind of guy....to somebody buying a lottery ticket (and the further comparison of your fellow citizens to the people who sell lotter tickets)...well, it just makes me want to puke.

Tell you what; if you're ever grievously injured by a giant soulless corporation, you're going to feel quite a bit differently about the people who do personal injury for a living.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

32. You wrote "They're not in it for the money"

Did you note that I was writing in response to that, and not to Edwards. To imply that all personal injury attorneys are not in it for the money is ludicrious. Some most certainly are.

Period.

[asdjrocky]

3. Do you really think any of the Edwards haters will look at this?

Great work, but it's probably wasted.

[LSK]

8. post #2 proves you right

Unfortunately.

[cuke]

24. No, it doesn't

You got one poster. ONE. POSTER

Please don't use that to smear others

[polichick]

9. Thanks! nt

[zabet]

11. To some DUers

he should not reap the
rewards of his work. He
should not improve his
lifestyle by buying a bigger
house, etc. etc.
This is very informative,
if only the ones that really
neede to, would read it.

[Cameron27]

12. That's fine,

but what's so special about his law career compared to that of any other very successful personal injury attorney?

[LSK]

14. This one is running for President

While the others are not?

:shrug:

[Cameron27]

16. lol

fair enough.

[Beaverhausen]

17. and his legal career is being discussed on at least 2 other threads

I think that is why this one was started.

[Cameron27]

25. Ok, thanks.

[Bread and Circus]

15. The whole concept of equating "dollar awards" with justice somehow seems..

bizarre to me. Frankly, I think this very American system of litigation is destructive at almost all times. There are exceptions but generally litigation is a fairly malevolent and paralyzing force in society. Even if it's there to "correct injustices", it doesn't really fix anything, lines the wallets of lawyers mostly, makes people live in fear of each other, and the truly rich are essentially immune to it.

However, I'd gladly cast a vote and some campaign dollars for Edwards if he gets the nom.

[LSK]

18. you should read this article

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html

One of the points is that if the Government is not going to regulate business to protect the consumer, the only other alternative is litigation and lawyers.

[surfermaw]

21. He is one of North And South Carolinas finest sons.

Let the republicans call him any thing they want... but first let them explain putting such a messed up young Bush in the White House, there is no comparison between the two, starting with their IQ

[Mabus]

22. K&R

Thanks for posting this information. It is important that we make up our own minds about what each of the candidates have done. It is refreshing to see such information presented in a non-inflammatory and positive way. I might think about supporting one of the candidates if their supporters were a little less negative.

A pleasant post about a Dem candidate always deserves a K&R.

[XemaSab]

23. Sorry to bash Edwards.

I hope we can still be friends? :shrug:

[Catchawave]

29. Kick for education !

:kick:

[frogmarch]

31. Great links. Thanks! n/t