Trial Lawyer Lobbying in Albany (A lot or a little?)

It is often said —  but only by those who scream for tort “reform” — that the reason the laws on personal injury and personal accountability don’t change is because of all the money that trial lawyers pay to lobbyists and to political campaigns.

Well it seems that, when it comes to lobbying in Albany, we trial lawyers don’t even crack the top 10 according to this just-released report by the New York Joint Commission on Public Ethics (download report). But, look who does make the top 10:

 

And if you are wondering about the top dog, the Committee to Save New York, it is a business group of mostly real estate developers.

One day I’d love to see a study of how much the Fortune 500 companies donate to campaigns and compare that to donations by consumer activists.

Something to think about.

Oh yeah, we trial lawyers spent just 355K for lobbying according to the report:

Tags:

3 Responses Leave a comment

  • Hayes Firm 2012.3.30 at 17:49 | Quote

    Those are some big numbers. And you were right, I was wondering about the “committee to save new york, as those named conglomerates always hide something interesting.

  • darius404 2012.3.31 at 00:19 | Quote

    There is a big reason there is not more change in these laws: people like to sue other people, and don’t like restrictions on their ability to sue. I’m sure there is more to it than that, but I’d say that is likely the biggest reason.

  • Eric Turkewitz 2012.3.31 at 09:32 | Quote

    There is a big reason there is not more change in these laws: people like to sue other people, and don’t like restrictions on their ability to sue.

    Well, restrictions already exist.

    But that wasn’t exactly the point of this post. It is about the vast amounts spent by big business and healthcare as opposed to consumer advocates.

Comments are closed.


The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.