Responding to an Idiot Lawyer Named Scott H. Greenfield

Responding to an Idiot Lawyer Named Scott H. Greenfield Is Scott H. Greenfield, a lawyer in NYC, an idiot or an imbecile? Hard to decide. He wrote an article attacking me—-for, among other things, writing that people who need lawyers should (other things being equal) consult lawyers working in a group. One reason I gave was: These lawyers are likely to have other lawyers looking over their shoulders. There are, in fact, more complaints against individual lawyers (proportionately) than against lawyers in groups. Doctors in groups, similarly, are less likely to be guilty of moral infractions. Now, this idiot Greenfield can’t even write. In his first sentence, he refers to “someone” as “they.” In his second sentence he writes about “reglazing a broken window.” Why the hell would anyone reglaze a BROKEN window? You would reglaze a NEW window. Now, I had written about young man who needed a lawyer to pay the medical bills he incurred at a hospital when a restaurant gave him a hidden bay leaf—-and who had not hired one. (My article resposibly urged middle-class people to hire lawyers when they need one.) What was the idiot Greenfield’s objection? No lawyer would take such a trivial case! With only several hundred dollars involved! So…there are no decent lawyers anywhere? Who would want to see simple justice done? Who would want to help someone in need? Perhaps this criminal lawyer Greenfield only accepts cases he is sure to win and where he will get an enormous fee. There are, alas, such lawyers. But there are also decent, ethical lawyers. Who are not idiots.