How to fix what is wrong without getting a Law School education.

The cost to attend law school creates intense narcissism in the students who make it through. Hugely in debt, no real job prospects other than once again starting at the bottom and trying to work their way up, I am of the opinion that many law students develop crappy attitudes.

I think there is a solution however. START YOUR OWN PARALEGAL COMPANY.

An ideal way to break out of the typical law student self-induced narcissism is to help others in your field, and actually make some money while doing it. As time goes on, some interesting things will happen.

You probably will have interactions with various law firms who maybe didn't even want to hire you when you first groveled with them for a job. You probably will end up helping people who are in pro per and pro se get their cases aligned. These clients, who maybe did not have tens of thousands of dollars to beg a lawyer to take their case, may actually have a grand or two available to spend with you.

You will begin to learn the nuances of the law, how different firms handle their paperwork, how judges react to various motions, and you will find out which cases win, and which ones lose.

The key is to not be so far in debt that opening a paralegal business won't even pay your expenses. Eventually, the contacts you make could put you in a position to either continuing to grow your paralegal business, or to step off and into the position at a legal firm that you wanted all along.

It would seem to me that if I were hiring for a law firm, and I saw a year or two of experience successfully running a paralegal business along with a solid law education, that that is the person I would hire.

Exciting announcement regarding our case.

I waited as long as possible. The insurance company is demanding the case be thrown out of court because we have not appeared at a deposition conveniently located at their building, which is over 25 miles away and because an exchange of evidence has not been happened either.

The judge had mentioned that speaking at the prior court hearings without an attorney is probably not a good idea. However, I have given up on finding an attorney for now, so I filed a response myself.

I have no idea ifwhat I wrote down will have any meaning in court or not. However, I did, and now I am waiting to see if the opposing side responds by tomorrow, or if we appear in court soon and see what happens.

So what is the exciting announcement? That I went ahead and filed a response.

Condensing my parents court case as much as possible.

Point number one. Car from behind rear ended my parents car. My mother suffered extreme neck pain from being hit from behind. The whiplash may have been exacerbated by the car she was in stopping on a decline that led to the street, the car from behind hit right around the time my father had stopped the car, causing a double jarring affect. The stopping of the car did not cause a problem, however that was the moment when the car from behind hit, causing the whiplash. There was over $3,000 dollars of damage to their car.

Point number two. The accident may have caused two my mother to experience two TIA's. She had never had a TIA before the accident.

Point number three. The elderly should not be required or forced to go to the same amount of therapy sessions as someone half their age. We maintain it is age discrimination to require the elderly to do the same level of therapy as someone half their age or receive a smaller settlement as a result.

Point number four. The insurance company can make an effort to help their policy holders avoid confrontational situations when exchanging insurance information after an accident. The insurance companies refusal to print a civility reminder into their insurance policy to be civil after an accident, especially if the cost is neglible to implement is an arrogance that can be addressed in a court of law.

Refutation of the morality vs legality argument.... When a product or service is MANDATED by law, the purchaser should expect a reasonable standard of care or service by the provider of said service or product. If the insurance provider is not providing that standard of service or care, the insurance company should be held accountable since the buyer of the product IS FORCED TO BUY THE PRODUCT BY LAW.

--------------------------------------

This is not about me over dramatizing what happened to my parents as somehow being more important than any one else's parents. This is about protecting the elderly from insurance behavior that is discriminatory. Please get involved, we need a lawyer and are located in southern california.

Another Newly Lawyered, not yet Liquored YouTube Video, Why men are abused.

This is another in the Newly Lawyered, not yet Liquored YouTube video theme to try and get the legal profession to lighten up a bit and either laugh, or cry. You'll be a better attorney if you actually have a real sense of humor.

For the newly Lawyered but not yet Liquored, a youtube video just for you.

Dumb Attorney Wanted in the Los Angeles Area.

I had no idea I was such an ignorant person, but several anonymous JD's forum posters have basically said such. When I was in high school a long while ago, I scored the second highest score in the social studies aspect of the ACT TEST for my entire high school class of over 600.

I find it fascinating that the one area that I probably excel in most scholastically that relates to social interaction also results in my being labeled a dumb dumb when it comes to "the law". Anyways, since I am a dumb dumb, I need to find a dumb attorney.

The qualifications for being a dumb attorney include caring less about the monetary value of the case and moreso about the possibility of setting not one, but two precedents, both of which will help protect the elderly and more fairly represent them when they are involved in automobile accidents.

The case does not need overly complex research. It just needs to be argued in front of a jury and a good result should happen. I am running out of time however. The insurance company can be made to look foolish in court, and have already more than doubled their original offer, yet I am still having difficulty finding a dumb lawyer to work with a dumb dumb such as myself.

Update on Protecting the Elderly, the Ultra Brief Version.

Purpose of the Case:

Establish that the Elderly should not be forced into a one size fits all ages treatment paradigm for injuries suffered during a traffic accident.

Since the elderly cannot realistically expect the same type of treatment result as someone half their age, their settlement offers should not be based primarily on how many times they go for treatments since the treatments may prove to be less therapeutic.

Add civility language to existing insurance policies (does not have to be enforceable by the insurance companies) to reinforce the message that policy holders remain civil towards one another when exchanging insurance information after an incident.

This is a no brainer. It costs the insurance companies virtually nothing to implement this notice to their policy holders, yet they refuse to do it.

---------------------------------------------

Desired Result of specific Case:

Compensate for two subsequent T.I.A's that occurred after the accident.

Compensate for actual neck injury

Compensate for gross indifference to request that insurance policies include wording to act civilly towards others when exchanging insurance information.

Eradicate the age discriminating practice of forcing the elderly to go to as many physical therapy treatments as someone half their age.

------------------------------------

Winning Argument:

When insurance companies won't even take the simplest of actions to help protect their elderly policy holders, they must be held accountable.