Santorum's Wife Sued Doctor For $500,000, Despite Senator's Calls For Tort Reform

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JB Books

Shooter Emeritus
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
14,111
Reaction score
190
Location
Hansenland
Just more proof these people are total hypocrites. They are quick to destroy the rights of working people, but have a totally different opinion when it comes to themselves. When are you people going to wake up and stop supporting these lackeys of Big Business?



Rick Santorum's Wife Karen Sued Doctor For $500,000, Despite Senator's Calls For Tort Reform

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has advocated capping medical malpractice awards at $250,000, but in 1999, his wife sued her doctor over a back injury and asked for twice that amount

As ABC News reports, Santorum's wife, Karen, sued a Virginia-based chiropractor for half-a-million dollars for allegedly bungling a spinal adjustment.

The suit charged that in November 1996, Karen saw Dr. David Dolberg for a spinal alignment, according to an article by Roll Call on Dec. 13, 1999. The adjustment, however, was performed improperly and resulted in a herniated disk that caused her physical pain and emotional suffering, and required surgery and multiple doctors' visits, she alleged.

She sued for $500,000, despite the fact that her medical bills totaled approximately $18,800.

While the jury awarded Karen $350,000, a judge later reduced the amount to $175,000.

By the time of the lawsuit, then-Sen. Santorum had taken up the cause of tort reform, twice sponsoring or co-sponsoring bills limiting the non-economic awards for pain and suffering that a plaintiff could seek to $250,000.

A significant part of what the Santorums were concerned about at the time of the lawsuit was that Karen would not be able to help the senator's re-election campaign, as she had done in the past.
 

BadgeBunny

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
38,213
Reaction score
15
Location
Port Charles
Pot, kettle, kettle, pot ... so what else is new? I have no problem with them capping punitive damages ... maybe that way the lawyers who take these kinds of cases will represent all their clients a little more equally and not just focus on the cases with the big payoff while letting the other cases linger in the file room.
 

JB Books

Shooter Emeritus
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
14,111
Reaction score
190
Location
Hansenland
Pot, kettle, kettle, pot ... so what else is new? I have no problem with them capping punitive damages ... maybe that way the lawyers who take these kinds of cases will represent all their clients a little more equally and not just focus on the cases with the big payoff while letting the other cases linger in the file room.

There is a little truth to that statement. However, another problem is the unrealistic expectations some clients have regarding the value of their cases in today's enviornment. On another note, I doubt you'd want damages capped if a bad doctor injured you. Truth be told, I don't believe anyone here can honestly say they'd support caps if it impacted them personally.
 

BadgeBunny

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
38,213
Reaction score
15
Location
Port Charles
There is a little truth to that statement. However, another problem is the unrealistic expectations some clients have regarding the value of their cases in today's enviornment. On another note, I doubt you'd want damages capped if a bad doctor injured you. Truth be told, I don't believe anyone here can honestly say they'd support caps if it impacted them personally.

Ha! Indeed I have had bad doctors who have made my injuries worse than they need to be, as well as plenty of doctors tell me there was nothing wrong with me. I still support the cap on punitive damages. It would go a long way toward making lawyers a little more honest and a lot harder working. Lazy, shiftless lawyers who advertise that they will work hard for you when nothing could be further from the truth are just as bad as bad doctors who label patients as drug-seeking or pyschosomatic if they don't fit into a little bitty box of symptoms that make diagnosis possible in 3.2 seconds in my opinion.

Unfortunately, I've have had personal experience with both types of "professionals" in action and have no respect for either.
 

Billybob

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
4,686
Reaction score
404
Location
Tulsa
Pot, kettle, kettle, pot ... so what else is new? I have no problem with them capping punitive damages ... maybe that way the lawyers who take these kinds of cases will represent all their clients a little more equally and not just focus on the cases with the big payoff while letting the other cases linger in the file room.


I would agree with that. But some cases don't even get to the file room. I know the case of an 88yr.old woman
whose daughter told her she couldn't take out a reverse mortgage for repairs on her paid for home that her husband and
son, (both deceased) built for her. The daughter told her she would loose it if she did, and that she'd end up loosing it
anyway if she didn't sell it. Then that daughter and another told her they'd help her move and provide storage for her
furniture collectibles, etc. Long story short, after the papers were signed they changed their minds, the woman lost
much of her belongings and most of the money from the home sale to move. Two lawyers evaluated the case, one
said it wasn't undue influence or fraud, and the other said the respondents didn't have enough to make the case worth it.

Justice for sale, hope you can afford it.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom