Clock Boy Returns

[Htown77]

His parents got suckered in.

@Statalyzer in my experience and based on everything we know about this family, the parents went shopping for an attorney to agree to file their frivolous claims and did not get "suckered in." The whole clock boy thing was a scheme by the parents to try and create a lawsuit in the first place. I agree with you Stat schools are out of hand and nowadays 99% of the time the school administrators are being ridiculous. This was a 1% case.

If working in the law has taught me anything, it is regular everyday Joes (or irregular Joes in some cases) that think up crazy lawsuits, not attorneys, yet all the other Joes believe it is attorneys creating thess lawsuits. While I completely agree that the 1 out of 50 attorneys agreeing to take the frivolous lawsuit is a bad actor, that does not happen until the Joe gets turned down by every respectable litigator, every not-so respectable litigator and until they eventually find those few least respectable litigators. Agree to take calls from prospective at a plaintiff's law firm for one afternoon. You will discover a lot of people are really terrible and people, not law firms, are driving litigation madness. It is a depressing realization. Full disclosure, I am not a litigator, but clerked at a litigation firm during law school.

My personal favorite are people who call and want to sue for something illegal they have done, and you have to explain that they cannot sue for their own illegal activity.

Edit: Hell, you would be suprised how many people you meet day to day, find out you are an attorney and ask if you will sue errrryyyboddyyyyy for them even after you explain you are not the kind of attorney that sues people.

 

[Mr. Deez]

@Statalyzer in my experience and based on everything we know about this family, the parents went shopping for an attorney to agree to file their frivolous claims and did not get "suckered in." The whole clock boy thing was a scheme by the parents to try and create a lawsuit in the first place. I agree with you Stat schools are out of hand and nowadays 99% of the time the school administrators are being ridiculous. This was a 1% case.

If working in the law has taught me anything, it is regular everyday Joes (or irregular Joes in some cases) that think up crazy lawsuits, not attorneys, yet all the other Joes believe it is attorneys creating thess lawsuits. While I completely agree that the 1 out of 50 attorneys agreeing to take the frivolous lawsuit is a bad actor, that does not happen until the Joe gets turned down by every respectable litigator, every not-so respectable litigator and until they eventually find those few least respectable litigators. Agree to take calls from prospective at a plaintiff's law firm for one afternoon. You will discover a lot of people are really terrible and people, not law firms, are driving litigation madness. It is a depressing realization. Full disclosure, I am not a litigator, but clerked at a litigation firm during law school.

My personal favorite are people who call and want to sue for something illegal they have done, and you have to explain that they cannot sue for their own illegal activity.

Edit: Hell, you would be suprised how many people you meet day to day, find out you are an attorney and ask if you will sue errrryyyboddyyyyy for them even after you explain you are not the kind of attorney that sues people.

A few things on this. First, Clock Boy's parents and the lawyers are both to blame. The parents may have come up with the lawsuit, but nobody forced the lawyers to take the case. They could have looked at the case and turned it down, or even if they initially thought it had merit because they took the parents at their word, they could have dropped it once they found out what actually happened. The lawyers are not slaves to their potential clients and are not innocent in this. Nobody has a gun to their heads.

Second, though most lawyers don't go looking for junky lawsuits to file (since they generally don't make money), there are Gloria Allreds out there who will take on a client solely for the publicity. They like to get in front of the camera, and it helps them grow their business. And just FYI - that's not per se sleazy or unethical. Remember, lawyers can't directly solicit clients (though plenty do so illegally), so if getting on TV (through advertising or publicity) gets you cases, so be it. I'm not a fan of Gloria Allred's, but I respect her more than I respect someone willing to commit barratry to get cases.

Finally, I took calls for a plaintiff's law firm for 8 years and practiced litigation. I had a staff, so I didn't typically pick up the phone, but all potential clients were forwarded to me for screening. There aren't "a lot of terrible people" out there, and there isn't "litigation madness." For the most part, that's insurance-driven propaganda and horse crap designed to enable those who want the courthouse doors slammed on people, and their racket works.

No, I'm not saying there are no bad people and no bad lawsuits. However, the truly nutty calls were unusual. The typical call was from somebody who was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time and was harmed through no fault of their own. That doesn't mean they all had good cases. However, those who didn't weren't frauds. They were people whose cases weren't viable - car wreck victims in which the at-fault driver was uninsured or was underinsured to the point that my presence on the case wouldn't have significantly benefited the client, people injured on the job but whose employers were uninsured, people whose paychecks bounced or were never given to them, people who were victims of medical malpractice but didn't have enough economic losses to make their cases work from a money standpoint, etc.

Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of clients that retained me were reluctant to actually file suit on a case and did so as a last resort. They also didn't expect to get rich (even when badly hurt). For the most part, they wanted their expenses covered and a little something for their trouble.

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

Thank goodness someone finally put a stop to that nonsense. The father did a video using all the usual legal buzzwords. How quickly they learn...Come to America, you can sue your way to a fortune.

 

[Htown77]

@Mr. Deez

A few things on this. First, Clock Boy's parents and the lawyers are both to blame. The parents may have come up with the lawsuit, but nobody forced the lawyers to take the case. They could have looked at the case and turned it down, or even if they initially thought it had merit because they took the parents at their word, they could have dropped it once they found out what actually happened. The lawyers are not slaves to their potential clients and are not innocent in this. Nobody has a gun to their heads.

^ I agree and called such lawyers bad actors in my post.

There aren't "a lot of terrible people"out there, and there isn't "litigation madness."For the most part, that's insurance-drivenpropaganda and horse crap designed to enablethose who want the courthouse doors slammedon people, and their racket works.

I do not support tort reform at all. I was not advocating for that. However, I disagree on the BS lawsuit phone calls and amount of terrible people out there. The amount I received was ridiculous. I am wondering if location may be the reason. I could see some places having a higher rate of nonsense lawsuit seekers than others. I also agree that there are plently of people that have been wronged and need compensation. I also do believe that more people miss out on compensation they deserve than actually sue or are able to sue.

My post was more about Stat talking about people getting suckered in. When it comes to frivolous lawsuit (not all lawsuits), I think more people look for lawsuits than get suckered in personally. I should have more clearly specified I was discussing the cause of frivolous lawsuits, which are a tiny fraction of all lawsuits.

Also, I reread my post, and I should not have used the term "litigation madness" which is often used as a tort reform term. I meant it in the sense of "nonsense lawsuits" not that we are suffering from too many lawsuits in this state. I 100% agree Texas is far far far far far too insurance/business friendly in precluding legitimate claims. Your take was fair though as I should have used a different term. I think we only disagree on the amount of people looking for BS lawsuits, but, like I said, I wonder if that location related and would be intrigued by a study on the issue (though there would be no way to conduct one due to confidentiality and other obvious issues). Anyway, like i said, my post was meant to discuss my opinion on frivolous suits, not the state of lawsuits as a whole.

 

[Mr. Deez]

My post was more about Stat talking about people getting suckered in. When it comes to frivolous lawsuit (not all lawsuits), I think more people look for lawsuits than get suckered in personally. I should have more clearly specified I was discussing the cause of frivolous lawsuits, which are a tiny fraction of all lawsuits.

I would agree that when the frivolous lawsuit does happen, it is client-driven. They call the lawyer and pay him to file suit. It's going to be very unusual to see it filed on a contingent fee, unless the lawyer is inexperienced and/or dumb and truly doesn't know what a merited lawsuit is.

I think we only disagree on the amount of people looking for BS lawsuits, but, like I said, I wonder if that location related and would be intrigued by a study on the issue (though there would be no way to conduct one due to confidentiality and other obvious issues).

That's possible, and obviously my experience is anecdotal. However, I didn't get many calls from people who were trying to do something frivolous or stupid. For every such case, I turned down probably 100 from people who were justifiably seeking representation but for whatever reason, the law or mere practicality (broke and/or uninsured wrongdoer) didn't afford them a remedy.

Did I get some goofy calls? Yes. Two come to mind, though one was likely a prank. One guy called up claiming to have been shooting an "adult film" in Austin and that the director instructed his "co-star" to put a candlestick up his rear, even though "anal penetration" was prohibited in his contract. He claimed severe rectal injuries. I tried not to laugh at the guy, because he sounded serious. Furthermore, I was pretty new to the job, so I didn't want to piss him off and risk him complaining about me, so I just tried to get him off the phone quickly. I said, "this might be outside my expertise. Most of my cases involve construction injuries or car accidents . . ." He then said, "well, I was playing a construction worker in the scene." At that point, I totally lost it and cracked up. He then scolded me for laughing at him and said he'd call somebody else. Was this a prank? I can only assume it was, but I was surprised he didn't laugh at some point.

Second goofy call. A woman called and said she was injured using a "personal pleasure device" (her term) and wanted to file a products liability case for vaginal injuries. She claimed it fell apart despite "normal use." Again, it was tough not to laugh at her, but I was able to hold back, because she sounded the whole time and didn't say anything that cracked me up. In fact, she cried in embarrassment. Obviously I turned her down, but about 3 months later, she called back, and I handled her car wreck case. When I was reviewing her medical records from her primary care doctor, guess what was in there? References to severe vaginal injuries sustained with a vibrator at about the time she previously called. It wasn't a prank call - just a weird injury case. Needless to say, I redacted those records before submitting that claim. lol

But I remember those calls, because they weren't common. How many calls did I get from construction workers who had no remedy because their employers were uninsured and because Texas law makes it damn near impossible to get at general contractors and homebuilders? Several per week. How many calls did I get from people who got in car accidents with illegal aliens who were uninsured? Even more.

 

[Joe Fan]

Clock boy filed an appeal
It bombed too

You may recall what Shapiro wrote about Obama and Ahmed

Ahmed’s quick meet-and-greet with Obama at Astronomy Night was a “bit of a downgrade” from the “star-studded event we expected between the President and Ahmed Mohamed where the President was going to knight him, give him the Order of Merit and then declare him the greatest scientist since Isaac Newton.”​

 

[Mr. Deez]

They more than lost. They got hammered with the Texas anti-SLAPP statute and are on the hook for attorney's fees. Basically, Shapiro took a piss on his face.

Frankly, Clock Boy's lawyers should have seen this coming. They should never have filed in Texas. It's borderline malpractice.

 

[Statalyzer]

Ahmed’s quick meet-and-greet with Obama at Astronomy Night was a “bit of a downgrade” from the “star-studded event we expected between the President and Ahmed Mohamed where the President was going to knight him, give him the Order of Merit and then declare him the greatest scientist since Isaac Newton.”

Not really funny or clever, but hardly a violation of the law either.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Not really funny or clever, but hardly a violation of the law either.

That isn't what prompted the lawsuit. This is a summary of the comments from the Dallas Court of Appeals opinion.

"Following these events, Hanson and Shapiro participated in two separate television programs. Hanson appeared on The Glenn Beck Program1 on September 22, 2015 and Shapiro appeared on The Kelly File2 on October 19, 2015. During his interview, Hanson stated that the alarm clock incident was “a PR stunt” and a “staged event” with the intent to create an “influence operation.” Hanson said that an influence operation is when “you take a situation and you create the appearance of something bad to get an effect.” Hanson stated that this incident created the appearance of an anti-Muslim bias where there was none and this incident was used to “portray Muslims as victims” and “Americans as bigots.” During Shapiro’s interview, he asserted that the
alarm clock incident was a “hoax” and a “setup” and that Mohamed used his son to advance his agenda."

And to be clear, I don't think Clock Boy's case has any merit even by reasonable standards. However, it is far too difficult to win a defamation case. A big reason why our media sucks is that they don't have to account for most of the idiotic and even false things they say.

In addition, Texas has a very, very partisan court system. Shapiro could have said the dad was molesting Clock Boy, they would have found a reason to toss the case.