<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Trial lawyers shut down customer service	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/05/trial-lawyers-shut-down-customer-service/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/05/trial-lawyers-shut-down-customer-service/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 23:59:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Scott McDonald		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/05/trial-lawyers-shut-down-customer-service/comment-page-1/#comment-7472</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scott McDonald]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 23:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4949#comment-7472</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Another take is here:
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-26-menu-foods-harassment_N.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-26-menu-foods-harassment_N.htm&lt;/a&gt;

Menu Foods isn&#039;t exactly an innocent entity here.  Their lawyers are probably just as bad as the ones running the class action mess.

At a previous hearing on Friday, May 18, the judge had cautioned Menu and Crawford that they should not contact people who had joined one of the lawsuits against the company. Legally, Menu cannot contact those plaintiffs directly but must go through their lawyers.

But in affidavits presented in court Wednesday, pet owners said they received calls that weekend from Crawford representatives who pressed them to answer questions even after being told the owners had hired lawyers. In some cases, the pet owners also received multiple calls from Crawford&#039;s computerized phone banks after telling representatives they were represented by attorneys, according to the affidavits.

&quot;Menu&#039;s representatives asked owners to sign releases which waived their right to get advice from a lawyer,&quot; said attorney Jay Edelson in an interview.

From another story that unfortunately is no longer linkable:

&quot;The CFO of Menu Foods, Mark Wiens, sold about half of his shares in the company three weeks before the poisoned pet food recall was announced, Canadian insider trading reports show&quot;

It&#039;s a pity that the lawyers will be reaping so much money from this, but Menu Foods isn&#039;t exactly blameless here.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another take is here:<br />
<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-26-menu-foods-harassment_N.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-05-26-menu-foods-harassment_N.htm</a></p>
<p>Menu Foods isn&#8217;t exactly an innocent entity here.  Their lawyers are probably just as bad as the ones running the class action mess.</p>
<p>At a previous hearing on Friday, May 18, the judge had cautioned Menu and Crawford that they should not contact people who had joined one of the lawsuits against the company. Legally, Menu cannot contact those plaintiffs directly but must go through their lawyers.</p>
<p>But in affidavits presented in court Wednesday, pet owners said they received calls that weekend from Crawford representatives who pressed them to answer questions even after being told the owners had hired lawyers. In some cases, the pet owners also received multiple calls from Crawford&#8217;s computerized phone banks after telling representatives they were represented by attorneys, according to the affidavits.</p>
<p>&#8220;Menu&#8217;s representatives asked owners to sign releases which waived their right to get advice from a lawyer,&#8221; said attorney Jay Edelson in an interview.</p>
<p>From another story that unfortunately is no longer linkable:</p>
<p>&#8220;The CFO of Menu Foods, Mark Wiens, sold about half of his shares in the company three weeks before the poisoned pet food recall was announced, Canadian insider trading reports show&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a pity that the lawyers will be reaping so much money from this, but Menu Foods isn&#8217;t exactly blameless here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Deoxy		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/05/trial-lawyers-shut-down-customer-service/comment-page-1/#comment-7471</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Deoxy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 10:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4949#comment-7471</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Another example would be the &quot;Million Little Pieces&quot; fiasco.  As I understand it, the company had ALREADY offered full refunds to anyone who bought the book... so what did the lawyers gain for their supposed clients?  That is, couldn&#039;t the clients sue the class action lawyer for not having the interst of the class in mind?

Wouldn&#039;t this also be GENERALLY true as well?

I mean, there should be SOME way out of this mess...

Sorry, my optimism is showing.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another example would be the &#8220;Million Little Pieces&#8221; fiasco.  As I understand it, the company had ALREADY offered full refunds to anyone who bought the book&#8230; so what did the lawyers gain for their supposed clients?  That is, couldn&#8217;t the clients sue the class action lawyer for not having the interst of the class in mind?</p>
<p>Wouldn&#8217;t this also be GENERALLY true as well?</p>
<p>I mean, there should be SOME way out of this mess&#8230;</p>
<p>Sorry, my optimism is showing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
