<p>Have u guys heard that cliche? How should we interpet it and respond?</p>
<p>my father who is a lawyer dissuaded me from going into law because there are so many lawyers out there who will take cases for a dime a dozen</p>
<p>I've heard from many folks that there are too many lawyers. On the other hand, I have heard from my dad (a bankruptcy lawyer) that there will always be need for bankruptcy lawyers. In a sense, it's much like Simpson's paradox. While the totality might have too many lawyers, each individual sector of law will always have a self-sustaining desire and necessity for lawyers.</p>
<p>Yes, I've heard this from a lot of people as well. You have to really study hard and earn high marks to get a job at major firms.</p>
<p>There's a surplus of bad lawyers, and a shortage of good ones.</p>
<p>Hahaha, well put, Greybeard. I'm insulted when I tell people that I want to become a lawyer and they grimace. There's just so many bad lawyers out there for the money, and they bring a bad name to the rest by pursuing personal injury-type cases.</p>
<p>There is such a thing as a good personal injury lawyer. I used to be one myself.</p>
<p>OK, sorry for the generalization, but you know who I'm talking about. I'm sure you've worked with quite a few of them.</p>
<p>It's cases like the woman her got burned by a hot pickle (not coffee, a pickle, this was an actual case) at McDonalds and then sued that brings a bad name to this profession... It's people like her husband, who sued because of mental anguish from having to look at his now disfigured wife, filing a lawsuit that really give this profession a bad name!!!</p>
<p>I hate the look on peoples faces when I tell them I want to go into law, but I know that there is the possibility I can be a good lawyer!</p>
<p>Allena,</p>
<p>Frivolous lawsuits are filed from time to time. I doubt that it's a big a problem as the purveyors of urban legends would have you believe, for the simple reason that insurance companies fight back. Aside from the ethical issues, there are strong financial disincentives to file frivolous cases.</p>
<p>I wouldn't assume out of hand that the pickle case was frivolous, by the way. If the press reports are to be believed, the franchise owner paid a settlement subject to a confidentiality agreement. It's generally defendants that want to keep the lid on the facts of this kind of case; their motives can range from not wanting potential plaintiffs to know they settled a frivolous suit for nuisance value, to not wanting the public know they microwave their sandwiches, or scald their customers. For all we know, the franchise may have been serving excessively microwaved sandwiches with pickles hot enough to cause severe burns. </p>
<p>It's a well established principle in our legal system that one whose negligence has injured another should compensate the person who is injured due to the negligence. There are other principles dealing with contributory negligence, or assumption of risk, and the notion that the law does not concern itself with trifles; but I'm not troubled by the spector of the owner of a restaurant being brought to task for the scalding of a customer.</p>