We have more lawyers in this country than we can use, but I can’t find one. I want to take a couple of private agencies to court for civil rights violation and discrimination and get punitive damages. I’d pay 50% or more of the awarded money to her/im.
Aggressive trial lawyers are very reluctant to sue non-for-profit organizations,even rich ones, even for severe law violations. In my case, the actual matter involves immigration. For them, it’s double jeopardy: trial lawyers do not know the immigration law, although in this case the immigration law per se is not concerned.
Immigration lawyers are afraid to go to court, they prefer to right letters, for years, and charge an hourly fee.
All lawyers’ referal services are field-based, i.e., they require me to name lawyer’s specialty. Then immigration lawyers send me to civil rights lawyers. Civil rights lawyers return me to immigration lawyers.
So, here I am.
GOOD. I noticed this typo too late. The “Edit button” brings me to a name/password page and neither is recognized. I usually check my posts for typos and such. Checking the title is not a habit (yet; I am a rooky here). Sorry.
Ordinary users can’t edit threads. Fortunately, I can and did.
It was good for a laugh, though… Wasn’t that the name of the Frozen Caveman Lawyer from SNL?
Peace,
I can sympathise!! Since my ex filed for divorce in 1989, I’ve been through 7 lawyers in 2 states trying to deal with the resulting legal problems. I’m currently in need of a GOOD lawyer in Indiana to handle things there. That’s been really hard to fine!! Everybody I’ve tried over the years, except for one woman who no longer does famliy law, treated me like I was an idiot, never listened to a thing I said and then stood up in court and mis-represented and mis-characterized everything! My ex is a lawyer, too ( 
) and is very quick to use these mis-statements against me. Basically, I need a lawyer to talk for me in court. I know the over all laws in Indiana pretty well by now. If I could, I would go pro se but I’m sure I don’t know the case law well enough to do so.
My lawyers here in Ohio have been very good and even return my phone calls!! 
Good luck!!!
MomCat
Here in DC, there is 1 lawyer for every 23 people. Really!
Don’t know how good any of them are, however.
Peace, you did not state the nature of the private organizations. If they are eleomosynary, their damages are limited by state law. (I think all states have similar type laws.) That may be one reason no lawyer wants to handle it.
The last post reminds me about the plaintiff who told his lawyer in the middle of a trial that he wanted a new lawyer. “OK,” the lawyer said. “I will get the substitution of attorney form for you to sign.”
“No, I don’t want a substituted attorney. I want another lawyer.”
“You want two lawyers? Why?”
“Well, the defendant’s lawyer is up there talking and thinking. When you get up there, there is no one thinking.”
GOOD lawyers, in my experience, usually don’t work for contingency fees (i.e. 40% of the take). They’re so GOOD that they can easily find enough clients to actually pay them as they work regardless of whether they win or lose. Of course, they win more than they lose else they wouldn’t get people to pay them up front.
So…if you believe you have a good case than hire an attorney and pay him/her. At the very least hire an attorney (NOT a free consultation) to investigate the law for you and counsel you on how strong your case appears to be. This will probably cost you several thousand dollars but if you have a righteous cause and a good lawsuit this may be worth it. If you’re paying cash up front attorneys are far less likely to turn you away.
I am NOT suggesting that all lawyers who work on a contingency basis are bad. However, the GOOD ones of those are more likely to track down clients with cases against BIG corporations where the take will be BIG bucks. I’m sure there are some young hotshots who haven’t made their mark yet but they are likely to be hard to find as well.
Good luck…
First, I think that so-called “charitable immunity” laws vary from state to state. I believe that some states have stricter laws, and others have less strict laws or none at all. For example, I recall a case that involved a New Jersey boy scout (or some kind of scout) who was allegedly molested while on a camping trip in upstate New York. There was a huge dispute over which state’s charitable immunity laws should apply.
All I’m saying is that, depending on your state, and depending on the nature of your claim, it is possible that you may not be barred by charitable immunity laws.
I am curious about the details of the basis of your claim.
Please feel free to share.
One other thing – if you should find a lawyer, make sure you are happy with him or her before you engage him. If you fire your lawyer, it can be hard to find another, since lawyers are often reluctant to take cases where a previous lawyer has been fired.
(Standard disclaimers about legal advice apply)
Just a few comments:
“Civil rights violations” are generally very difficult to prove, and punitive damages are generally very difficult to get, unless you are dealing with truly outrageous conduct.
Aggressive trial lawyers will sue anybody, so long as they believe that their client has a good case and that the defendant will have the resources to pay. It makes no odds to them that an organization is non-profit, except to the extent it might mean the organization is poor and therefore judgement-proof or nearly so.
With respect and without knowing the first thing about your case, trial lawyers do not often turn down good trial cases (such as civil rights violations and discrimination) because the underlying area of law is not their expertise. So long as you can do the trial work, you can look up the relevant law (or call an specializing colleague in to consult). My guess is that it is more a matter of simple math. The lawyers you have spoken to have decided that your case does not offer a high enough probability of winning to be worth taking on a contingency, or the lack of funds of the proposed defendant(s) means the case is not (in their opinion) worthwhile.
This is not to say that your case may not have merit; it may. But when a lawyer looks at whether or not to take on a contingency case, he or she must look at the chances of success, because unless the lawyer can succeed, he or she will not get paid. So it is true that there may be tough cases that people cannot find contingency lawyers to take, because if the outcome is a toss-up, the lawyer may well be unwilling to gamble on losing. And you cannot “sweeten the pot” by upping the percentage you give to the lawyer (in your case, offering 50%) because most states (well, all states, so far as I know) limit the amount of contingent fee a lawyer may collect – usually about 30% to 40%.
None of this is of much help to you, I know; but I thought I try to explain why you might be encountering the difficulties you are.
From what I’ve heard, the percentage, or the maximum percentage, of a contingency fee is fixed by law, or by
ethical conduct standards (probably enforced by the relevant bar association). You may be fortunate enough to find a lawyer who will handle this on contingency, but he or she won’t be allowed to accept more than a certain amount on a contingency basis.
I am very surprised. This goverment got too much. First, they take half of my income in taxes. Then they tell me how to spend the balance. Is there a legal minimum too? I thought that the purpose of antitrust laws was to keep prices competitive, not to fix them. Am I allowed to pay a guy 50 for oil change? And how this maximum fee law is enforced? Who knows how much I REALLY pay him? Can I receive my award in cash? And how come the ABA stands for it? The government can fix the attorney fee (which does not come out of my pocket), turn around and sue M becase they stiffle competition? Beats me!
Just another possibility:
The lawyers you’ve already consulted ARE good and gave you good advice – i.e. you don’t have a case.
Just because a lawyer tells you what you want to hear doesn’t make him (or her) a good lawyer. Conversely, a lawyer who doesn’t tell you what you want isn’t necessarily a bad lawyer.
I know nothing about the facts of your case. However, I’ve spoken to enough potential plaintiffs in my time to suggest to you that if you’re having trouble finding a lawyer to take your case, perhaps that should tell you something. Maybe your case isn’t as good as you think it is. There are tons of struggling lawyers out there scrapping for cases(as all the lawyer bashers are ever so quick to point out.) This makes it highly unlikely that a claimant with a case of any value will go unrepresented.
Again, I don’t know anything about you or your case. But the fact that you’ve talked to numerous lawyers and none have been interested in representing you indicates to me that your case probably isn’t as good as you think it is.
I would suggest that you do some hard, unemotional thinking about your case. Try to view it as an impartial judge would. Be brutally honest with yourself. Lawyers, even bad lawyers (especially bad lawyers) do not make a habit of turning away profitable cases.
Good luck.
Just to add to the thoughts expressed above, it’s worth noting that the law is deceptively simple and often unduly harsh. What I mean is, there are many situations where you have been seriously wronged, and it feels like you ought to be able to get a big recovery, but the law won’t let you recover significant (or any) damages. I don’t want to trash your case without knowing the facts, but it could be that your situation is like this.
My favorite example of this sort of situation involves a rule known as the “filed tariff doctrine.”
A long-distance phone company had an offer where you would get as many long-distance phone calls on fridays as you wanted, for free. Lots of people signed up and proceeded to take advantage of the plan. The phone company decided to renege on its promise, and filed a tariff making the plan inapplicable to certain calls. Upon learning that the best feature of the plan that they’d signed up for was gone, certain customers brought suit against the phone company. Result? Judgment for the long-distance phone company!
Anyway, if you feel comfortable sharing Peace, I’d be curious to know the facts of your case. Feel free to omit names.
(standard disclaimers)