Likewise, conservatives argue that Tort Reform is necessary to curb "run away" lawsuits, but when former supreme court nominee Robert Bork injured himself at a speaking event, he also did not hesitate to file suit for his injuries. The conservative Bork, who is elderly, was at the Yale Club to deliver a speech, and the club failed to provide steps and a handrail to assist him in ascending the dais. He fell backward as he was attempting to climb up the stairs, injuring both his leg and head. He suffered a contusion and hematoma in his leg as a result of the fall and required both surgery and physical therapy to minimize his injuries. He now walks with a limp. As a result, the Yale Club agreed to pay an undisclosed amount of money in settlement of the suit. Is a "tort reformer" someone who has not been the victim of someone’s negligence? Is it presumptions or bias that make some believe that most lawsuits are frivolous, only changing their opinions when they suffer the realities of such injuries?