Comments on: Caesarean sections: ooooops… https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/09/caesarean-sections-ooooops/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Thu, 14 Sep 2006 10:32:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Deoxy https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/09/caesarean-sections-ooooops/comment-page-1/#comment-4036 Thu, 14 Sep 2006 10:32:50 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=3937#comment-4036 Td bat me to the punch – that’s EXACTLY what will happen.

Ain’t the American legal system great?!?

]]> By: nevins https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/09/caesarean-sections-ooooops/comment-page-1/#comment-4035 Wed, 13 Sep 2006 18:28:23 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=3937#comment-4035 If an OB has to choose here, the option for the C-section is still the favorite.

Dead babies are worth far less than damaged babies because there are no long term medical expenses and all the other causes for damages dreamt up by plaintiffs. Also the statute of limitations for dead babies begins to run immediatly, whereas allegedly damaged babies don’t have the statute clock begin to run until age 18 or even 21 (as it is in Missouri). The dead are a bargain all around.

]]> By: Ted https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/09/caesarean-sections-ooooops/comment-page-1/#comment-4034 Wed, 13 Sep 2006 01:11:36 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=3937#comment-4034 Are you kidding? It’s the best possible scenario for the plaintiffs’ bar: half can be the “you’re not doing enough C-sections” attorneys, and the other half can sue on the “you’re doing too many C-sections” theory.

A colleague of mine who does class action work for mortgage companies was telling me how, in the wake of Katrina, his clients are facing suits for not doing enough to ensure that home-buyers held flood insurance. Just a few years earlier, those same clients were facing class actions alleging that they were forcing flood insurance down the mouths of borrowers to line their own pockets.

]]>