I'd need to see a really high level of proof that the lawyer was an active, intentional party to the conspiracy. Our legal system is based on even bad people having access to lawyers who's job is it to advocate for them as much as possible, while the other side does the opposite, and the truth comes out in court. Suing lawyers for representing people undermines that.
In the case of civil law as opposed to criminal, and this is a civil law case, a lawyer gets to decide who they are willing to represent and whether the case holds water. No lawyer is obligated to take on a client whose suit appears to be fraudulent or have no merit. If they knowingly took on fraudulent lawsuits, there are legal remedies.
Unfortunately, Chicago especially is full of crooked lawyers who will take up any case if they smell easy money in it. There is a whole industry of fake injury and concussion claims that have allowed many lawyers in Chicago to make millions. As a physician I was recruited several times to assist in such practices for really high payments per patient. Of course I was to make "independent" decisions, hint, hint, nudge, nudge. My conscience did not let me participate, but I am shocked what lawyers can get away with without any risk of being taken to court for fraud.
There was that case of Ernest Saunders, defendant in a major British fraud case. He made the only known recovery from Alzheimers in medical history. Or perhaps the diagnosis was happily incorrect.
I’ll never forget being called by a law firm on the way to the hospital after an accident where I was found not at fault. I promptly told them to find a different person to feed off of while I worked with my existing legal help.
"But if the Chicago archdiocese wins its case, it may strengthen the sense among some American priests that change is due in the practice of some dioceses — and that among those changes, that the rules and norms of the Dallas Charter and Essential Norms, established by the bishops the wake of 2001, are due for a review."
The Dallas Charter, and specifically in how it is applied and often even ignored when it comes to protection of priest's presumption of innocence, is far past due for a review. But the Archdiocese's action has little to do with protecting priests. It is all about money and remains so, at least from what I see. Justice takes a back seat, at least when it comes to those who are falsely accused.
The Diocese is absolutely correct - false claims do tremendous harm to those who have been truly abused and suffer terribly. They bear a heavy cross with profound pain and lingering trauma that most of us, thankfully, cannot even fathom. I feel incredibly angry on their behalf and disgusted by these fraudulent claims. Lord, bring repentance and conversion to those in most need of your mercy.
Hope they are also suing the lawyers who represented the phony claimants. The lawyers help perpetrate these frauds by their advertising.
I'd need to see a really high level of proof that the lawyer was an active, intentional party to the conspiracy. Our legal system is based on even bad people having access to lawyers who's job is it to advocate for them as much as possible, while the other side does the opposite, and the truth comes out in court. Suing lawyers for representing people undermines that.
In the case of civil law as opposed to criminal, and this is a civil law case, a lawyer gets to decide who they are willing to represent and whether the case holds water. No lawyer is obligated to take on a client whose suit appears to be fraudulent or have no merit. If they knowingly took on fraudulent lawsuits, there are legal remedies.
Unfortunately, Chicago especially is full of crooked lawyers who will take up any case if they smell easy money in it. There is a whole industry of fake injury and concussion claims that have allowed many lawyers in Chicago to make millions. As a physician I was recruited several times to assist in such practices for really high payments per patient. Of course I was to make "independent" decisions, hint, hint, nudge, nudge. My conscience did not let me participate, but I am shocked what lawyers can get away with without any risk of being taken to court for fraud.
There was that case of Ernest Saunders, defendant in a major British fraud case. He made the only known recovery from Alzheimers in medical history. Or perhaps the diagnosis was happily incorrect.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Saunders
I’ll never forget being called by a law firm on the way to the hospital after an accident where I was found not at fault. I promptly told them to find a different person to feed off of while I worked with my existing legal help.
"But if the Chicago archdiocese wins its case, it may strengthen the sense among some American priests that change is due in the practice of some dioceses — and that among those changes, that the rules and norms of the Dallas Charter and Essential Norms, established by the bishops the wake of 2001, are due for a review."
The Dallas Charter, and specifically in how it is applied and often even ignored when it comes to protection of priest's presumption of innocence, is far past due for a review. But the Archdiocese's action has little to do with protecting priests. It is all about money and remains so, at least from what I see. Justice takes a back seat, at least when it comes to those who are falsely accused.
The Diocese is absolutely correct - false claims do tremendous harm to those who have been truly abused and suffer terribly. They bear a heavy cross with profound pain and lingering trauma that most of us, thankfully, cannot even fathom. I feel incredibly angry on their behalf and disgusted by these fraudulent claims. Lord, bring repentance and conversion to those in most need of your mercy.
Appalling that someone would talk about the COST to dioceses!! Imagine the COST to priests FALSELY accused and victims whose lives destroyed.