Overlawyered Believes Polling Judges Is Nonsensical
Category: In Your Face
Ted Frank, at Overlawyered, must have spent years studying the techniques of the old logical argument called poisoning the well. His latest pre-emptive strike is against a Baylor Law Review study which, apparently, arrived at conclusions not to Ted's liking.
Bill Childs notes a Baylor Law Review study polling Texas judges on whether they think there are problems requiring tort reform.
I can't imagine why anyone thinks such a study will produce useful results. [Read as: Only lunatics would think of asking judges if more tort reform is needed.]
But there's a larger problem with the very nature of the study. Judges who correctly run their courtroom and follow the law are generally not going to have runaway juries, so they are likely to say (and even say correctly) that their juries generally don't produce outlandish results. The problem requiring reform are judges who are in the pocket of the plaintiffs' bar, and create judicial hellholes...[Read as: Some judges work in jurisdictions where verdicts are not pleasing to corporations, insurance companies and me.]
Polling judges in judicial hellholes to find out whether there is a need for legal reform like polling O.J. Simpson to find out if there's a problem with domestic violence. [Read as: Only Hitler would be a worst person to poll.]
Nevertheless, expect to see the poll widely used by the litigation lobby and their academic water-carriers in upcoming months and years. [Read as: Any professor who disagrees with me and my buddies in Corporate America is intellectually bankrupt.]
May I suggest that Ted has been carrying so much water for so long that he is developing two humps on his back.
TrackBack URL for this entry: