Lawyer vs. Adjuster

Every day in a defense lawyer's life.

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• xtranormal

[TheDHXTRA]

Well, congratulations, big shot.  By your own acknowledgment, you were a litigator prior to being an in-house counsel, and the opposite career path is far more unusual. My point earlier was that while MOST companies DO have in-house counsel, MOST of them have different duties apart from litigation. I see nowhere that I said in house counsel, so calm down and put your faux outrage down. That's like LeBron being offended if one says he is inadequate to fill in for Joe Mauer.

[TheDHXTRA]

Unfortunately, aringoth....you're simply wrong. Even the biggest and the most effective and efficient insurance companies hire outside counsel in nearly all cases of litigation. In-house matters may deal with things like coverage, but as far as litigation goes, having in-house counsel handle litigation is akin to the old adage about the lawyer who represents himself having a fool for a client. Often, in-house counsel are so far from the courtroom that they have no business being in one.

[Gladaseeya]

@TheDHXTRA I respectfully disagree with some of your comments. Almost all major insurance companies have and use in house counsel to defend their insured's on a large variety of their cases. Although the in house attorneys are employees of the ins. co., they defend the ins. co's individual insureds personally. Ins. Co's also rely on outside counsel or panel counsel as well. Almost every coverage dispute I have seen went to outside counsel, not in house counsel.

[TheDHXTRA]

@Gladaseeya I've litigated exclusively my entire career. While every insurance company has and uses in house counsel, and should, litigation is best left to the professionals, and in-house counsel simply are not in court enough to handle most litigation. Moreover, coverage disputes are a different thing altogether. In-house counsel are adequately equipped for that, but often can't partake in that decision because of bad faith concerns. Litigation is another matter entirely.

[automan1223]

The reason they do not pay is easy. The insurance mafia builds huge plush skyscrapers every year, hires ad' agencies to come up with creative spokespersons who's I.Q is so low they could not work in fast food.(either a lizard or a strawberry AX murderer ....).....in order to steal such low I.Q customers from the next insurance company. All the while not paying legit claims because they insist that the system is rife with fraud. You cannot even say the word "insurance" in a court proceeding.

[TheJudge313]

Sorry, but "you're simply wrong.” I’ve been staff counsel for 4 years with a major carrier. I’ve had a constant case load of about 150, taken over 40 cases to a jury verdict and was a litigator prior to being staff counsel. As such, your comments of house counsel being inferior are insulting. I have more trial experience than many outside firms who bill the shit out of a file until the carrier finds it cheaper to settle than continue to litigate. It funny tho 'cause us gotta deal wit claims to.

[jcarroll597]

Gladaseeya: This is a fairly accurate depiction of the claims industry. I practiced insurance defense before switching sides to sue these jerks. In-house lawyers are overworked and have little meaningful trial experience (there are exceptions re: trial experience, but most in-house insurance lawyers will admit to not having too many files). Of my cases in litigation, about 10% are defended by in-house counsel. If I was assigned in-house counsel to defend me, I'd hire my own attorney.

[aringoth]

Sadly not true in all cases, any insurance company worth their dollar has in house representation.

[ozsweet]

friggin' hilarious and on point

[clamarca75]

This is very true!