3 ms·
Not to jinx it, but it seems unlikely. You'd think anyone with a leg to stand on would've come forward already (or been sought out by the plaintiff) for this su
by spondylosaurus 2y ago
Not to jinx it, but it seems unlikely. You'd think anyone with a leg to stand on would've come forward already (or been sought out by the plaintiff) for this suit.
- bbor 2y agoI think they’re saying they’ll change the argument, not find people to support it. E: I love how I’m always wrong about law, even when it sounds simple… [other claimants that we expect to try again] were able to intervene as plaintiffs at the lower court level
- Spivak 2y agoThis isn't always the case, but you're right it's pretty odd to go through with this case on such shaky ground. It's almost surely because they couldn't find anyone better, many of these cases wait until you find the perfect plantiff and it can take a lot of time/money searching. They would have to be in a very sympathetic court to get the ruling they want given the harm they're trying to demonstrate. It makes no sense that medical procedures should be banned because other doctors might be asked to treat complications. That's how literally every medical intervention works.
- spondylosaurus 2y agoYeah, that reasoning would have crazy implications. No one's allowed to get surgery anymore because you might catch MRSA while you're recovering in the hospital afterwards... no medication because you might have a side effect or allergic reaction....