News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Lawyer Whose Clients Didn’t Exist by xmprt on Saturday April 18, 2020 @06:07PM (#22911523)
Maybe the article is painting him in this light but what other choice did he have? If he dropped the suit then all the legitimate people wouldn't have any recourse. The people who messed up were the field agents.
Re:The Lawyer Whose Clients Didn’t Exist by phonon on Saturday April 18, 2020 @08:03PM (#22912201)
He could have properly investigated the identity of the claimants at any time. More like he didn't want to know.
Re:The Lawyer Whose Clients Didn’t Exist by boublepop on Sunday April 19, 2020 @05:01AM (#22914521)
The choice of not breaking the law in collecting names in the first place, of not knowingly going ahead with a case he knew was bogus.

His work was a scam from the start, he had the choice to stop or come clean at every point of the way.

He’s supposed to ensure the people represented exist. That responsibility shouldn’t go away because he paid some poor runners 10$ to write down the names.

Imagine a rule of law where that was a legitimate escape from consequences. I could sue your boss in your name for some made up bogus claim, and when you come out saying: “wtf, I never had any say in this!?” I could walk away clean with a “oh yea, that’s true and I knew that was the case from early on, but I paid this hobo 2$ to write down your name, and I had to carry on, just in case you’d want to actually bring the suit anyway”, while pocketing my cut of the case costs.

Re:The Lawyer Whose Clients Didn’t Exist by solarkraft on Sunday April 19, 2020 @08:33PM (#22920049)
> The people who messed up were the field agents.

I'm basing this on your TL;DR, but not only did he know (no way to get rid of the fakes?), it also sounds a little bit like he gave them some winks along the lines of "whatever if they're not real, just bring me claimants".