<?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: Examiner series on trial lawyers	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/09/examiner-series-on-trial-lawyers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/09/examiner-series-on-trial-lawyers/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:18:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Bumper		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/09/examiner-series-on-trial-lawyers/comment-page-1/#comment-8967</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bumper]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:18:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=5338#comment-8967</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Upon going over to read  &quot;Is there a doctor in the house ... who hasn’t been sued?&quot; I was treated to either a delicious bit of irony or possible greed*. The Google ad placements were predominately for law firms looking for fresh victims. But the cherry on the sundae was stuck in between all these ads trolling for dollars, were a couple of ads for malpractice insurance. I guess their thought was that if any doctors happened by and were sufficiently frightened with the rogues gallery of attorneys looking to separate them from their hard earned money, now would be the time to start looking for malpractice coverage.

* I have been told that these lawyer ads are high dollar, but they could be blocked by the site operator if desired, but at a probable loss of income.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Upon going over to read  &#8220;Is there a doctor in the house &#8230; who hasn’t been sued?&#8221; I was treated to either a delicious bit of irony or possible greed*. The Google ad placements were predominately for law firms looking for fresh victims. But the cherry on the sundae was stuck in between all these ads trolling for dollars, were a couple of ads for malpractice insurance. I guess their thought was that if any doctors happened by and were sufficiently frightened with the rogues gallery of attorneys looking to separate them from their hard earned money, now would be the time to start looking for malpractice coverage.</p>
<p>* I have been told that these lawyer ads are high dollar, but they could be blocked by the site operator if desired, but at a probable loss of income.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
