Donations influenced Supreme Court de...

Donations influenced Supreme Court decision, doctor says

There are 24 comments on the DispatchPolitics story from Jan 18, 2011, titled Donations influenced Supreme Court decision, doctor says. In it, DispatchPolitics reports that:

A doctor says the Ohio Supreme Court caved to political considerations when it refused to hear an appeal of a malpractice case against him, noting that the lawyer on the other side had supported the campaign of then-Chief Justice Eric Brown.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at DispatchPolitics.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
WHS76

Reynoldsburg, OH

#1 Jan 18, 2011
Sounds like to me the electing of state supreme court nominees need some kind of oversight.

Since: Feb 10

Columbus, OH

#2 Jan 18, 2011
WHS76 wrote:
Sounds like to me the electing of state supreme court nominees need some kind of oversight.
I agree. Regardless of the actual facts in the case, when a plaintiff or a lawyer before the court is also involved in political funding of the court, it gives the appearance of corruption. Supreme court justices have to avoid anytaint of favoritism or corruption. If they won't do it themselves, then some sort of oversight is needed.
Snorky

Columbus, OH

#3 Jan 18, 2011
Just a few days ago we read about the coverup of a harassment charge against a judge by other judges. So much for equality of law in Ohio. Nonviolent civil disobedience against the judiciary may be the only solution.

Since: Aug 10

Columbus, OH

#4 Jan 18, 2011
The political association may be coincidental, but it should never be part of our judicial system. This is another rock solid reason why party association in judicial elections should not be allowed. The appearance of impropriety here is just too great. Legislating from the bench? That is another topic for the Dispatch to tackle, and this leads right into that. Do the people of Ohio really want this?
William

Columbus, OH

#5 Jan 18, 2011
The ironic thing about this story is that the Supreme Court has been in the pocket of insurance companies for at least the last eight years. Ruling after ruling after ruling cuts away at the rights of Ohio citizens in favor of insurance companies and big business. This favorably impacts doctors who are insured by these companies. They even ruled that doctors are immune if they have a resident in the room with them. Even if they are billing privately and working in a private hospital. In that circumstance guess who pays for their negligence? We the tax payers do. Judge O'Conner ran on a platform that suggested she has been responsible for brining jobs to Ohio. Putting aside how apparently bad she is at that job, it's troubling that she honestly feels that is her role as a judge. I don't know what happened with this particular case, but Dr. Cox, as a doctor, is given grossly preferential treatment in this state by the very justices he's bashing. I wish the Dispatch would report on the real corruption of this court. It doesn't protect patients, consumers or Ohio citizens. It doesn't even consider their side of the case.
Allen

Columbus, OH

#6 Jan 18, 2011
Typical lawyer politics as usual.
Tired and Gone

Columbus, OH

#7 Jan 18, 2011
We have a legal system, not a justice system. Our entire system is effected by back door politics and lawyers donations to each other for political campaigns. Lawyers fight the wrong side of cases in the name of cash, not justice! Our forefathers would be so disappointed in us.......
Columbus IT worker

Columbus, OH

#8 Jan 18, 2011
Another bang up reporting job by the Ctown Disgrace. So two justices stepped down and were replaced, by who? and were they connected in anyway to the case? From the way the article read, the two the stepped down stepped down because the party spent money against them. The one that didn't step down was the one that had the money spent on his behalf. And that is the one that appointed the two unnamed replacements.(And yea, I could probably do a google search and determine who the replacements are but geeze, why should I have to do my own research for the article? I have other things to do, where as the reported was only doing half his job.)
Fletch

United States

#9 Jan 18, 2011
You get as much justice as you can afford..OJ
jackiekt

Grove City, OH

#11 Jan 18, 2011
Recently retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, counseled Americans to remember the imperative of a ''fair, impartial and independent'' judicial system.''Partisan infighting and hardball politics,'' she notes, could well ''erode the essential function of our judicial system as a safe place where every citizen stands equal before the law.''

Ohio ranks 2nd nationally in state Supreme Court campaign spending. Let's get money out of judicial elections.

Jacquelyn K. Thompson
http://thompsoninthehouse.blogspot.com
Won Long Tung

Saint Paul, MN

#12 Jan 18, 2011
So the neuro-radiologist is mad because he has to go to trial over screwing up a diagnosis that totally ruined a guy's life? Better call the WAAAAAMbulance! Heaven forfend a trier of fact be given evidence and asked to reach a verdict!
TED Lost

Hilliard, OH

#13 Jan 18, 2011
And remember Eric Brown who got badly beated for the Chief Justice job in November, was appointed in the final days of Ted Strickland to a judge position in Franklin Co. Municipal Court.

What will he be doing there next?

Make sure he is not elected to the position. A political hack of the democratic party. BTW his wife is Franklin Co Commissioner Marilyn Brown.
Lost

Westerville, OH

#14 Jan 18, 2011
Mr. Nash,

I had trouble following this article. It said that the courts sided with Dr. Cox, and then another court picked it up on appeal and then eventually threw it out. Now it's got to go to trial.

If they threw out the appeal, wouldn't the original court ruling on the side of Dr. Cox stand?
Frank

Cleveland, OH

#15 Jan 18, 2011
Why does the doctor seem so confident that with the elected justices he would prevail? That's what truly gives rise to concern. Here is a doctor that is upset because the supreme court refused to review a case that the court of appeals said did not treat a plaintiff properly. Plus, if I'm correct, it's a case where the doctor admitted neglegence and did not even testify on his own behalf. How disappointing that the supreme court did not bail him out.
L Berry

Alliance, OH

#16 Jan 18, 2011
Ex-Gov Strickland appointed Brown to Chief Justice position. He was not an elected official. The GOP Chief Justice died and was replaced by a Democrat. Chief Justice Brown not only voted but also appointed two temporary justices to fill in for the two GOP who were seeking re-election.
Where are all of the Liberal Democrats who post hate filled comments when ever a GOP is involved. The two GOP Justices steped down because of reelection, But Ex-Chief Justice Brown elected to stay even though he had accepted mucho dollars in campaign contributions. He was the best appointee money could buy.
ramseyjame

Bellefontaine, OH

#17 Jan 18, 2011
Everyone is really missing the point: here is an incompetent excuse for a doctor, that caused great harm to this patient and his family, now he is whining because it appears that he may not get by with his neglegence! Hopefully, the court will eventually rule for the patient and not this creep trying to be a doctor. After this excuse for a doctor loses in court, I hope the medical board takes a look at suspending this bums right to practice.
L Berry

Alliance, OH

#18 Jan 18, 2011
LOST...The first Appeals Court through out the case. The next higher Appeals Court re-instated teh case. The Supreme Court initially accepted the case, but then elected to not hear the case. So the second Appeals Court Ruling stands. A trial will be help and let a jury of his peers decide guilt or innocence.
Yum Yum Sauce

Columbus, OH

#19 Jan 18, 2011
Tired and Gone wrote:
We have a legal system, not a justice system. Our entire system is effected by back door politics and lawyers donations to each other for political campaigns. Lawyers fight the wrong side of cases in the name of cash, not justice! Our forefathers would be so disappointed in us.......
You might just want to look up some of the clients of former President, founding father, and attorney, John Adams. Your comment is hilariously ignorant.
Yum Yum Sauce

Columbus, OH

#20 Jan 18, 2011
Won Long Tung wrote:
So the neuro-radiologist is mad because he has to go to trial over screwing up a diagnosis that totally ruined a guy's life? Better call the WAAAAAMbulance! Heaven forfend a trier of fact be given evidence and asked to reach a verdict!
That's what I'm saying. Seems like the losers always cry that they were denied justice...not that maybe, just maybe, their case was crap, and they deserved to lose.
rick

Maumee, OH

#21 Jan 18, 2011
William wrote:
The ironic thing about this story is that the Supreme Court has been in the pocket of insurance companies for at least the last eight years. Ruling after ruling after ruling cuts away at the rights of Ohio citizens in favor of insurance companies and big business. This favorably impacts doctors who are insured by these companies. They even ruled that doctors are immune if they have a resident in the room with them. Even if they are billing privately and working in a private hospital. In that circumstance guess who pays for their negligence? We the tax payers do. Judge O'Conner ran on a platform that suggested she has been responsible for brining jobs to Ohio. Putting aside how apparently bad she is at that job, it's troubling that she honestly feels that is her role as a judge. I don't know what happened with this particular case, but Dr. Cox, as a doctor, is given grossly preferential treatment in this state by the very justices he's bashing. I wish the Dispatch would report on the real corruption of this court. It doesn't protect patients, consumers or Ohio citizens. It doesn't even consider their side of the case.
Typical victim mentallity, everybody else is against you. What a way to live

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Radiology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
MRI / CT / Ultrasound / X-Ray E-Learning Course... Jul '15 MedicalPro 1
News Contract jobs at PMCH Jul '15 t-art 4
Hitachi Aperto vs Hitachi Airis II Jul '15 t-art 3
MRI Abdomen W & W/O Contrast, CPT 741830 Jun '15 krdm999 1
Sinus CT scan safe? (Mar '06) Jun '15 fahad 78
3 ct scans in a month! (Mar '10) May '15 Grove street 8
News Why Some Doctors Are Hesitant To Screen Smokers... Apr '15 Schmones 1
More from around the web