Locally, the Orange County Bar has planned a number of activities in honor of Law Day, including presenting its Liberty Bell Award to an outstanding citizen, providing live mock courtroom demonstrations to school children across Orange County, and arranging for students from the Migrant Farm Workers Ministry to job shadow members of the judiciary as well as attorneys in the Ninth Judicial Circuit.

All of the attorneys in our firm are extremely proud of the work we do every day to advance what President Eisenhower called the principles of the rule of law that enhance the cause of the just in the settlement of disputes.

The law requires that litigants and their attorneys exercise due diligence during jury selection. Thus, if an issue is not raised by counsel during jury selection, a juror should not be criticized afterwards for non disclosure.

In this case (and others like it), why didn’t Siegel’s fleet of lawyers see fit to research the jurors’ histories while the lengthy trial was ongoing? Perhaps it was because they thought they were winning! It was only after the verdict didn’t go their way that Siegel’s lawyers began crying foul.

Last year, our firm was involved in two jury trials where the defense claimed “juror misconduct” after the jury ruled against their clients. The defense lawyers in each of these cases never asked questions about the subject matter they later claimed the jurors concealed, nor did they investigate the jury’s background during the trial. In both cases, the trial court judge denied defense motions for a new trial in part due to their failure to ask questions when they had the opportunity. If Mr. Siegel’s lawyers failed to ask direct questions about juror litigation history, they should not be able to cry foul after the fact.

This is just another example of those in the insurance defense industry trying to manipulate the legal system in their favor when they cannot win on a level playing field. Other efforts over the years include attempting to change the laws in favor of the defense or to provide complete immunity and becoming involved in judicial races by supporting candidates who are preferential to their cause.

This is an unfortunate decision for American consumers. Total immunity is the last thing you want to give corporate giants with deep pockets. Our legal system is designed to hold people and corporations accountable for their wrongdoings. The Court’s decision has created a slippery slope toward eroding our fundamental and necessary system of checks and balances.

I fear this decision will only motivate large corporations to politicize the FDA by seeking approval of known dangerous medical devices in order to get immunity from personal injury lawsuits. I also predict that pharmaceutical corporations will soon petition the courts for a more expansive interpretation of this decision to include corporate immunity from personal injury lawsuits derived from prescription drug injuries or deaths. History has shown that the FDA does not always approve safe drugs.

I agree that lawyer advertising has cheapened our profession. In Florida, it’s been out of control for quite a while. Everywhere you turn from TV and radio to billboards and the yellow pages “there’s another ad for a personal injury lawyer.

Not only has excessive lawyer advertising negatively impacted our profession, it also is affecting our clients. During jury selection before a trial even begins, personal injury lawyers often have to overcome a negative impression solely because of all the lawyer advertising. Our firm is strongly opposed to advertising. We prefer to get our clients the old fashioned way: by earning a good reputation for the work we do and developing strong relationships with our peers and others in the community.