Comments on: “What made you think I wanted 53 firms churning on this case?” https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/02/made-think-wanted-53-firms-churning-case/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:46:34 +0000 hourly 1 By: MattS https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/02/made-think-wanted-53-firms-churning-case/comment-page-1/#comment-347997 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:46:34 +0000 https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=68888#comment-347997 In reply to great unknown.

How else would a lawyer define useful?

]]> By: great unknown https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/02/made-think-wanted-53-firms-churning-case/comment-page-1/#comment-347996 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:19:15 +0000 https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=68888#comment-347996 In reply to Rusty Bill.

Unless you define “useful” as making fistfuls of dollars, regardless of benefit to the plaintiffs. That definition is so prevalent, it should be enshrined in Black’s Dictionary.

]]> By: Boblipton https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/02/made-think-wanted-53-firms-churning-case/comment-page-1/#comment-347995 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:19:37 +0000 https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=68888#comment-347995 In reply to Rusty Bill.

Loads of billable hours! How can that not be useful?

Bob

]]> By: Rusty Bill https://www.overlawyered.com/2018/02/made-think-wanted-53-firms-churning-case/comment-page-1/#comment-347994 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:47:48 +0000 https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=68888#comment-347994 53 law firms on a single case? They won’t be able to get out of their own way, much less accomplish anything useful.

]]>