Decluttering is beneficial for the good of the mind and, according to Dante, obligatory for the good of the soul. The Fifth Cornice in Purgatory, as described in Cantos XX and XXI of that part of The Divine Comedy, is where souls of those who were hoarders in their earthly lives atone for their sin.
To avoid that punishment in the afterlife, one can get rid of his horde while still on earth such as by prayerfully distributing it to those in need. Culling one’s possessions of clutter is also being thoughtful of others, especially when the others are family members who potentially will be tasked with going through your stuff if you become incapacitated or when you die.
After 60 years of independent adulthood and nearly 50 years of law practice, I have surveyed the accumulations in my home and office to find many possessions pure clutter. But amidst the junk, if only for the value of reminiscence, I also find treasures . . . distractions, more accurately. An immediate example is a magazine with commentary on the “malpractice crisis.”
Beginning in law school, I had access to legal journals and magazines and tended to keep the more interesting or relevant ones for future reference. An early one, “Case & Comment, The Lawyers Magazine,” had timely articles entitled “Malpractice Crisis: Fact or Fiction” and “Medical Malpractice Insurance Crisis” in its July-August 1975 issue.
The first item, written by a law professor at George Washington and Howard Universities in Washington, D.C., concerned the types of statutory responses, federal and state, that were being considered to address increasing medical malpractice claims. The article’s conclusion: “Very little malpractice is predicated on incompetence. The ‘best’ and most competent physician, rather than the ‘quack,’ is the subject of the malpractice suit.” (Id., by Harold L. Hirsh, J.D., M.D., Vol. 80, No. 4, pages 3-6.)
The second piece, written by the then chairman of the Liaison Committee of the Massachusetts Medical Society and the Massachusetts Bar Association, identified four “proportional role[s]” played in the crisis by (1) the health care profession, (2) the legal profession, (3) the patients, with their “public and consumer-oriented expectations that favorable healthcare outcome is guaranteed or, at the very least, a compensable right,” and (4) the insurance industry with its “impersonal philosophy.”
He declined to “purport a theory,” but noted that, after the enactment of no-fault motorist insurance laws in his home state, “it [was] most curious to the casual legal observer that an overabundance of former auto tort attorneys [suddenly became] expert in advocating patient-plaintiff rights.” He also noted that adverse loss development “for all insurance companies” was generally recognized to be a result of the “increasing numbers of claims, payments for defense, settlements, and judgments [together with] the effects of inflation on all of the cost factors associated with claims. . .”
Among the conclusions reached: health care professionals and institutions are “target-defendants;” the annual number of lawsuits and the cost of defense, settlements, or judgments were “expected to increase” (and did); remedial state legislation is “absolutely essential;” “the health care sector [must] demonstrate credibility in its willingness and capacity to expose and correct all real and potential hazards to patient well-being” (which it has done); and, lastly, “[in 1975] there is no grandiose plan to resolve the medical malpractice dilemma.” (Id., by Richard F. Gibbs, M.D., J.D., pages 8-14.)
In the latter third of the 20th century, professional liability became a dilemma nationwide. Proposals for federal legislation focused on national healthcare which would package low-cost professional liability insurance for all physicians who would subscribe to federally set fee schedules. Eventually, individual state legislatures addressed the crisis.
In Mississippi the result was the Tort Reform Act enacted in 2004, signed into law by Governor Haley Barbour, making Mississippi one of the first states to cap non-economic and punitive damages (inter alia, Mississippi Code Ann. §§11-1-60, 11-1-65). Because of the law’s venue amendments and other provisions, “for the first time in years physicians, named as defendants in the action, were assured of a convenient forum and certainty in the process.” (“The Impact of Tort Reform,” by Linda McMullen, Esq., Journal of the Mississippi State Medical Association.)
Beyond ancient articles, the yellowing magazine in my collection includes a not-so-dated letter to the editor from a practicing lawyer who complained about “irresponsible” judges who insult “both clients and lawyers,” such as when “the judge is late [for court]” or “no judge or jury is available for trial” that result in “the client blames the lawyer.” (Id., page 2.) Incidentally, this same day I have received in the mail a local attorney’s announcement of his candidacy for Chancery Judge. Included in his bona fides, he promises, “as a judge, [to] treat attorneys, litigants, court staff, and clerks with courtesy [and] work to ensure the court remains accessible, responsive, and efficient.”
Purely nostalgic, because I remember seeing and/or using these things, are ads for “factory reconditioned IBM Dictation Equipment;” Olivetti “System-14” word processors with “the incomparable storage capacity of 250,000 characters (150 average size business letters);” six-compartment “trial files;” cassette storage carrousels; and engraved letterhead stationery on parchment stock ($28.00 for 1,000). (Id., severally.)
The distraction of one magazine has taken an afternoon. Six full boxes of clutter still remain. In my opinion, and Dante’s, this slow pace portends a penitential visit to the Fifth Cornice.
Chip Williams is a Northsider.
