There is a rather simple neurological test used by neurologists to determine the mental status of a patient. It is called a Mini Mental Status Exam. This is a series of 9-10 questions including repeating words back, counting backwards from 100, dividing by 7's, naming the President, date, copying a clock with a certain time, and a pentagon. It is an extremely rough measure of competence or capacity. A score of 21 is consistent with lacking capacity. However, this is not an extensive, sophisticated test but is helpful in determining what might need to be done for the patient in the futureMaryland Personal Injury Lawyer.
Recently in Personal Injury Category
A jury in
The Estate and family of the young boy who was savagely attacked and killed by a tiger in the San Francisco Zoo has settled their case. Two other boys who were also attacked have yet to settle. The Zoo paid a confidential amount for the settlement. They also agreed to erect a memorial in the boy's honor
In an unusual settlement, a homeowner
agreed to settle a claim against him for allowing underage drinking at
his home. In reality, the homeowner was unaware of the drinking but it
was alleged that he provided improper supervision and maintained an
environment that permitted the activity. The Illinois homeowner agreed
to pay 2.5 million dollars to a paralyzed teen.
A recent study reveals that most Plaintiffs who pass up a settlement offer and go to trial received less of an award than they would have received had they taken the offer. The study further found that Defendants were wrong in 24% of their decisions to proceed to trial as contrasted to the Plaintiff's being wrong 61% of the time. The study further found that in only 15% of the cases, both the Plaintiff and Defendant were right in that the award was less than the Plaintiff's demand but more than the Defendant's offer. Under some estimates, approximately 80% to 92% of cases settle. Many skeptics of the profession argue that there is motive to go to trial so that lawyers can collect fees for preparation and attending trial.
The Study will be published in the September issue of The Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. On average, the study found cost plaintiff's $43,000.00. For defendant's, the cost was much greater, a whopping $1.1 million. The study found that there must not be an understanding between the lawyer and client about the odds of winning at trial. This leads to one of two conclusions: 1. Lawyers are doing a poor job explaining the odds to their clients, 2. the Clients are not taking their Lawyers advice.
The study further found that some of the bad decisions made by Plaintiffs were associated contingency fees. The Study further found that the common errors by the defense were where there was a lack of coverage.
Law Students do not learn how to handicap trials in law school. Only hands on experience will allow a lawyer to develop this skill. This is a skill that can be learned only after numerous trials are actually tried and either won or lost.
