Lawyers should disclose malpractice insurance
I liked your Aug. 10 editorial on attorney disclosure of malpractice insurance. I am a member of the bar who supported the ABA proposal. Apparently, the Hawaii bar did not agree with me. I am also licensed in California, and that state requires that we include in our written fee agreements a statement as to whether we carry insurance that we opine to be sufficient to cover claims which arise out of the case. Written fee agreements are required in all cases where the fees exceed $1,000.Additionally, malpractice insurance is required whenever the lawyer practices as a legal corporation (or similar entity.)
Malpractice insurance is a benefit for my client as well as my protection. I am human, and humans make mistakes. If I screw up, should my client pay for it? No. That is why I carry insurance. I believe it is the morally correct thing to do.
I would also note that when California adopted the rule of disclosure, there was no noticeable increase in malpractice filings. Thus, any fear that the adoption of the rule would open the flood gates of litigation appears to be misplaced.
Attorney at Law
Honolulu
(Editor's note: Despite the Hawaii State Bar Association's opposition, the American Bar Association approved a model for disclosure of malpractice insurance.)
Dobelle debacle will irk us for long time
The governor appoints a Board of Regents to our university. The board hires a man at a salary that exceed what most of us old fogies earned in a lifetime of drudgery and toil. The board fires the man. He gets more than a million in cash -- to appease him -- and perks for another mil or so. He's given a job with a salary that would sustain some of us for many years. He's also gifted with a quarter million for his attorneys -- for a month's work. They look as pleased as the cat that ate the rat.Is this welfare for the plutocrats -- all at taxpayers' or students' expense? Each time we hunt down a bargain now at the supermarket or find an affordable pharmaceutical product we can afford, we'll remember where the tax is going! Is this the best there is?
Honolulu
Dobelle became victim of status quo system
After the toe-the-line, status quo days of Kenneth Mortimer, the broad-minded and charismatic Evan Dobelle may have been too liberal for the Board of Regents. Yet his heart has always been in the right place and his intentions true to the University of Hawaii mission. Considering all that the board wanted in a new leader and all that was promised by Dobelle, was any of this unexpected?From this perspective, Dobelle did not get what he deserved. He did not rip anyone off, hurt anyone, or disparage the good name of the UH. He was basically dismissed for exceeding expenditures to his residence, keeping inaccurate financial records and for using discretionary funds made available to him for marketing purposes. None of which may have been his fault. The UH has indirectly admitted this by implementing several policy changes.
Although he has become victim of the very system he was hired to change, he has done more good for the UH in his short term as president. I am saddened by his removal and deeply concerned about the ambiguity, inconsistencies, secrecy and abuse of power by the regents.
Mililani
Mufi's negative politics damages mayoral race
Mufi Hannemann is at it again. Pali commuters are greeted every day at the scenic lookout by a big, ugly sign that speaks poorly and falsely about his opponent in the mayor's race, Duke Bainum. This kind of negative campaigning started in 1986 when Mufi smeared Neil Abercrombie in advertisements that alleged the then-congressional candidate was a marijuana smoker and soft on drugs. It has continued in every election he's been involved with since -- and in Mufi's case, that's a lot of elections.If Mufi spent as much time campaigning on the issues as he spends trying to tear down his opponent he might get elected.
Kailua
Stryker foes represent many in Hawaii
Mahalo to all who came out to the three Stryker publicity events to express disapproval of any expansion of militarism in Hawaii. We had a great show of support for our message.A number of people talked about how disgusted they were by the display of pure militarism in a community that has been ravaged by poverty, drugs and violence. The principal at Waianae Intermediate School was told that the Strykers would be displayed at her campus and she had no choice in the matter.
The protest had representatives from Waianae, Nanakuli, Makaha, Haleiwa, Kaalaea, Kapahulu, Kaimuki, Papakolea, Moiliili, Waimanalo, Kaneohe, Kalihi, Leilehua, Kapaa, Kauai, and even a group of students from Los Angeles. There were Hawaiian activists, veterans, unionists, Methodists, Buddhists, opio, kupuna, Quakers, environmentalists, farmers and hunters.
We told the soldiers from Washington and Alaska that if they came in peace, they were welcome, but their weapons and killing machines were not. We explained that the guns that terrorized Iolani Palace 111 years ago have only multiplied with every expansion of the military.
We pointed out the shameful irony that one Stryker costs as much as the school's budget for a year, a school that cannot meet all the needs of its students. We pointed out that weapons are not allowed on school grounds, and yet they brought their weapons to this school. We recounted the horror of military destruction and contamination of the environment in Hawaii, and condemned the enormity of the Stryker land grab.
Mahalo to all the folks who came out to resist the Stryker invasion of our communities, from Hilo to Waianae.This is only the beginning.
DMZ Hawaii/Aloha Aina
|
