Cyrus: Please, don't demean yourself and the profession. You do by quoting a hopelessly biased, self-serving buffoon, devoid of credibility.

I appreciate the words of instruction and insight from Supremacy Claus who, obviously, is a self-appointed guardian of our profession's status.

I am indeed "hopelessly biased" and "self-serving." (No secret there.)

I leave my status and skills as a "buffoon" to those with more experience in this field than I. (Some friends have said I have a sense of humor if that counts.)

And, on credibility, well, I guess it just depends on whether someone agrees or disagrees with my point of view. I am the product of a career seeking justice for those wrongfully injured. As I say on my blog: I am what I am, and I make no apologies. I am willing to accept apologies, however.

Cyrus, I know you risk further demeaning yourself by permitting these words on your blog. Go for it!

Greedy: Will you support removing all self-dealt, common law obstacles to legal malpractice claims by all adverse third parties? Let torts improve your idiotic, failing, criminal cult enterprise.

Many duties of the lawyer to the adverse third party are expressly enumerated in the Rules of Conduct, of Civil and Criminal Procedures, of Evidence. Their violations would be per se intentional torts. The obstacles also violate any provision in the state constitutions guaranteeing access to all to the courts of the state.

If you do not, shut up.

I oppose all tort reform, including Supreme Court imposed artificial limits on punitive damages. I favor ending all immunities, including Hans, and the Eleventh Amendment itself. No one gets immunity. No exception. Immunity violates the First Amendment, implying an unAmerican Divine Connection.