Bringing Light & Sense to the DLC Process

[FELA FELLA]

Dear YL-

You would have to be deaf, dumb and blind to not know my feelings on the Designated Lawyer Selection [DLC] process that is utilized by the BLET, BMWE, UTU and every other rail union. It is a system that is as old as me and has been fraught with deception, greed and a "good ol' boy" system since day one.

How many people have vowed to clean it up? How many people have gone to jail, absconded with members' monies, been charged with crimes?

The time has come to clean this mess up and I am starting this thread in hopes that, those that believe like I do, will speak up and let your voices be heard!

I believe that, at bare minimums, to be any Union DLC, you should have to take a test on the FELA law. You should also have to agree to represent the Members for a 25% contingency fee. You should also agree to give .05% of your FELA fees back to the Union that you have received the designation from and they should be required to take 50% of that money and use it for a designated RAIL charity and the other 50% should be used to fund conventions.

These are the requirements that should be made open and obvious. No firm should be given preference over another and each should be free to negotiate down their fee below 25% if they want to in order to give a better deal to the member that contacted them. Any firm that receives a DLC designation that is caught using "runners" should forever lose the DLC status and that would include all lawyers in it.

I urge you to speak out. Mr. Sorrow from the BLET has every reason in the world to to do this and take the lead in the industry. I am not saying any DLC currently with a designation is (1) not deserving of it; (2) does not work their butts off in an excellent manner; (3) is not capable to practice FELA law. In fact, I disavow any reference that this post says anything about any one lawyer or any one firm. What I am saying is the "proof is in the pudding" and one cannot deny the problem exists!

Steve Gordon
FELA Lawyer

[Reggi]

What's a Runner?

[FELA FELLA]

Originally Posted by Reggi

What's a Runner?

Though the definition varies from state to state; and, in some states, there is a penal code violation; and, in every state, it would be unethical behavior:

It is paying, or promising to pay, anything of value to solicit a particular personal injury case.

[nsrlink]

Originally Posted by FELA FELLA

Though the definition varies from state to state; and, in some states, there is a penal code violation; and, in every state, it would be unethical behavior:

It is paying, or promising to pay, anything of value to solicit a particular personal injury case.

Is a runner different than an "investigator" or same thing, just a different name?

[FELA FELLA]

Originally Posted by nsrlink

Is a runner different than an "investigator" or same thing, just a different name?

Quite different!! The issue of whether it is unethical or, in some states, illegal, is obviously the intent and purpose. Historically, firms that due an abundance of FELA work have employed ex-Railroad employees to work as their investigator/business promoter. This is completely acceptable and, in fact, a smart business decision. If you personally know someone that has gone to work with a law firm and then you are hurt, it is human nature for you to trust that person's recommendation.Does that person schmooze people, organize parties and also do investigation on specific cases wherein the firm has been hired and/or contacted? Yes and that is completely permissible.

It is where that person or some other [any] person is compensated to "bring-in" a specific case that crosses the line. I hope that answers your question.

[fatboy]

Had a friend e-mail me an article about a DLC "winning" a conciderable judgement for an injured Conducter. With-out going into any of the particulers of this case. I would like to say that it seems that DLC's are taking the more "cut and dried" approach when deciding which cases to handle. It seems that if the cases aren't blatently in their favor,they aren't taking them. Shouldn't the DLCs have a more equal oportunity mentality and shouldnt they represent ALL claims the union members have??

[FELA FELLA]

Originally Posted by fatboy

Had a friend e-mail me an article about a DLC "winning" a conciderable judgement for an injured Conducter. With-out going into any of the particulers of this case. I would like to say that it seems that DLC's are taking the more "cut and dried" approach when deciding which cases to handle. It seems that if the cases aren't blatently in their favor,they aren't taking them. Shouldn't the DLCs have a more equal oportunity mentality and shouldnt they represent ALL claims the union members have??

This is an excellent question! Having never been a DLC, I am not privy to what the current DLC requirements are in this regard. Perhaps other DLC can comment what the requirements are in this regard.

However, the DLC qualification process that I envision would remedy that problem real quick. There are many very good, very hungry, very hard working competent FELA lawyers that are not DLC. If the process of qualifying were similar to what I have outlined in the original post, you would have more DLC! Which, I believe, is a better thing for the members. Hence, if you a case that is 'iffy', undoubtedly, as a member that wanted to get a "pre-qualified' lawyer and/or law firm, you would have more choices!

I have been a lawyer for 25+ years. I have taken cases that others have rejected and we got a good result. This phenomenon is not exclusive to me nor my firm. Others have done it and do it everyday. What a client needs is a lawyer to believe in their case and work it like it is there only case. Is it possible to lose....of course. But when you try hard and never give an inch, you can perhaps get a reasonable settlement offer or even win at trial.

The more DLC the merrier I say.

[gsxr1000mxz800]

Originally Posted by fatboy

Had a friend e-mail me an article about a DLC "winning" a conciderable judgement for an injured Conducter. With-out going into any of the particulers of this case. I would like to say that it seems that DLC's are taking the more "cut and dried" approach when deciding which cases to handle. It seems that if the cases aren't blatently in their favor,they aren't taking them. Shouldn't the DLCs have a more equal oportunity mentality and shouldnt they represent ALL claims the union members have??

All the dlc's i know will handle any and every case brought to them IF a railroader signs with them. however please remember that the dlc's will give railroaders free advice and sometimes, yes read this, sometimes a case does not warrant or necisitate legal representation and they advise to the worker to seek compensation with the claim agent and if they need advice feel free to call back.

[fatboy]

I agree- Clients need to be comfortable with their lawyers and I say if the DLC isn't the guy whom you want to take your case or vise-a-versa, Do your home-work and find Legal Council you are comfortable with. There are NO laws that say you are stuck with the DLCs. Its surprising how many of my co-workers think DLCs are their only option.

[FELA FELLA]

Originally Posted by gsxr1000mxz800

All the dlc's i know will handle any and every case brought to them IF a railroader signs with them. however please remember that the dlc's will give railroaders free advice and sometimes, yes read this, sometimes a case does not warrant or necisitate legal representation and they advise to the worker to seek compensation with the claim agent and if they need advice feel free to call back.

Answering questions for free is not exclusive to DLC. However, when a railroader has a question they want to know they are getting advice that is learned and based upon experience.

Please do not misunderstand my initial post. I am advocating an enlargement of the number of DLC because, and maybe I am wrong but I do not think so, I believe that there will be more DLC than there are currently if the selection system moves to a qualification to practice FELA law approach rather than the selection process that has plagued unions and union members for years.