St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-03-10
PERSONAL INJURY CASES.
Another Attorney Objects to the
Legislative Bill.

Another Attorney Objects to the
Legislative Bill.
To the Editor of the Globe.
| never had personal injury case in
court in my life. During thirteen years
of practice but two applicants tor re-
dress Of that nature applied to me. One
l settled at short notice and the other
was withdrawn from me because L neg
lected to make an iron-clad contract
with my client. | can therefore claim
exemption from any personal motive i'll
not fayOring the bill before the legisla
ture ON that subject. In fact, the fore
going confession may shut out all my
future prospects as personal injury
lawyer"
Allow me to invite the members of
legislature to the consideration of few
reasons why the bill should not pass.
First-Any bill which tends to pre-
vent the freedom of action OF the people
is vicious in tendency and Should not
pass.
Second While occasionally an attor
ney here and there will act unconSciona-
bly, toward his client in his charges, it
is not the rule. But suppose it is the
rule? The client acquieSces in it be-
cause it is the lesser of two evils. He
considers it far preferable to take 81, 600
Or less than to get nothing; and the lat
ter Will surely be the case II this bill
passes. And mark this: 1t affects only
the poor man. If the rich man is injured,
he asks odds OF no one. He pays his
own costs, and any lawyer will take
his case for reasonable compensation.
In fact. these cases of the rich injured
rarely go to court. The corporations
know better than to hight wealthy
man. They pay the damage with bow,
and the matter is ended. But if they
can only haraSS the poor man and de
priye him of this last prop, the at
torney's aid, they will be secure from
such suits. And, after all, gentlemen,
what is it to you or me if such suits are
started? Are they not tried by twelve
reputable citizens? And cannot they
decide whether the claim is just or un-
just? II just, should the injured not
nave the right of action, even though
they can obtain this right only through
the aid of an attorney? If the claim
is unjust, who is punished more
than the lawyer? He footS the bill
and gets nothing. Those who receive
adequate compensation in such cases
are comparatively few to the large num-
Der who have been injured and lose
their flgntS ana receive nOtnlng, owing
to the natural prejudice against such
cases. ana the Scheming and fighting of
corporations to discourage these suits.
have known men who have been in
jured. and the attorney offered to take
the case for % per cent of the amount to
be realized if the injured person paid all
the costs, OF 80 per cent if the attorney
advanced the costs. and the client pre-
ferred to accept the latter proposition to
paying out the costs himself, and run
ming the risks.
Third-Whie | will admit that 40 or
so per cent of the amount realized is too
much in the majority Of cases. this,
however, L claim is a matter for the
parties to decide between themselves.
If, on account of the influences and I'M
demanded prejudices thrown around
these cases, verdictS are difficult to OBJ
tain, the public is largely to blame for
it and the eXtortiOnate charges. 1t the
prejudices against injury cases were
abandoned and corporations were made
to understand that it is perfectly legiti-
mate for person injured to bring an
action of this kind, justice would be
more fully subserved, verdicts more
frequent, the attorneys chances less un-
crtain. aud he could consequently
afford to charge less. This would
facilitate settlements with parties liable,
who now work upon these prejudiceS to
defeat the claims. II. Ii. HERBST.