... of the subject matter.

You stated:

"Why don't we compromise on tort reform so that you can prove to us how pure your intentions are towards these 'victims'? Let's not cap awards to the 'victims' instead lets cap compensation to the lawyers. Maybe we could limit it to provable costs plus 20%? This would go a long way to showing the public that your sincere interest is in making the 'victims' whole and not just enriching yourself like you accused the insurance companies of doing."

I responded that for federal tort claims, attorney fees are capped at 20% and for the VA case I highlighted, that is the contingency fee, which fee will be split between two law firms. Yet, you just glossed over that and continued with your ad hominen attacks.

In fact, every client I represent is welcome to talk to any lawyer and negotiate any contingency fee they think is appropriate.

I routinely cut my fee to make sure the client ends up better off financially. I recently represented a little girl whose face was torn up by a dog. We recovered the dog owner's homeowners policy limits for her. I set up the conservatorship through the probate court and did everything for 5%. Every plaintiffs lawyer I know also routinely cut their fees to help out clients.

Again, you are embarrassing yourself with misinformed opinions.