Here we go again

[Ozarker]

Coffee is hot. I have zero sympathy for anyone that has been on this earth for 80 years and doesn't know that.

The adversarial system is why we pay billions of dollars for medical tests we don't need and why emergency rooms and trauma centers are closing all over the US. Doctors can't charge enough to pay for malpractice insurance.

Companies don't pay those large awards. Consumers do.

Yes, insurance companies complain about it. Then they raise rates to pay for it.

 

[bgott]

"You take like the famous one of the little old lady and her coffee in the lap thing at Mickey D's. What few people took the time to read about was how the eighty something lady had third degree burns on the insides of her thighs. And the litigating attornies was able to show that Mickey D's had a policy of paying off hundreds of people injured by their hot hot coffee. Even though they'd paid dearly for injuring people just cause they'd found out people preferred to go coffee hot hot. It was their policy the heck with the fact that it hurt people, old people, kids, not just people to stupid to keep from spilling it on themselves."

The reason McDonalds get nailed so deep is because it was company policy to serve coffee over 140 degrees to keep people from drinking too many free refills. At least that is what some commentator on the tube said.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Ozarker, Looser Pays sounds real good, and I might be tempted to go for it, but I've been the beneficiary of being insured by the same carrier (Aetna SUCKS) as the drunk who hit me. The Drunk had a BAC of .034 by blood, and the accident happened 1/2 mile from the bar he had been drinking in for 9 hours.
Aetna saw fit to hire lawyers for more than it would have cost to buy me a new truck and pay my medical bills. They also have doctors who are still paying off for malpractice cases they lost, and in my case, a ghynecologist testified I didn't need medical care. Just to add icing to the cake, Aetna BOUGHT the judge. You might think this an unfair statement, but I did go to the trouble of pulling the Judges campaign records, and Aetna and the 2 Lawyers were contributors to the Judges campaign.
Half way thru the trial, the judge threw the case out of court.
I talked to Jury members, and they were all on my side and wanted to give me a big award, and they were pissed at the judge.
Looser Pays presumes a fair and equitable Court, and that doesn't exist.
Medical malpractice - well lets just say if Doctors policed their profession, there would be one he!! of a lot less malpractice. They's all rather pay a few bucks more in premiumss, and pass it along to the patient, than they would clean their own house.
It's real easy to criticize lawyers till the moment comes when you need one desperately. Hopefully, that day will never arrive at your door.

 

[Ozarker]

So what you're saying is that the current system didn't work for you but you want to keep the current system just in case it might work the next time???????

Sorry but I will not be upset when the system gets fixed so people can't sue fast food joints for making them fat. I won't be upset when the system gets fixed so that activists groups can't file suits that they know they will lose but do it anyway in the hope that they will bury small companies in legal fees trying to defend themselves.

The system is broke.

 

[Bird]

Ozarker, loser pays is a simplistic solution that sounds good, and would go a long ways towards stopping frivolous lawsuits, but unfortunately would do nothing to improve "justice". For instance, if we assume that Franz had a legitimate suit, but the other side paid more and better lawyers, bought the judge, etc., then he lost and would have to pay not only his expenses, but theirs, too. And that's the reason the medical profession at least partially obtained your "loser pays" system in Texas; it protects incompetent doctors quite well. And I can assure you that Franz's case was not at all unusual. Before you sue anyone, you'd better find out who the judge will be and whether your lawyer is a better friend and/or bigger contributor to his re-election campaign than your opponent's lawyer.

And perhaps the sad part is that it's nothing new. My dad told me about being a caddy at a country club when he was a teenager in the '30s and caddying for judges and lawyers on the weekends. He said he heard them settle many a case on the golf course, and even went as a spectator to some of the trials and watched the lawyers argue, nearly come to blows at times, etc. to put on a big show when they already knew what the outcome was going to be. In later life, I learned that he wasn't kidding.

And you say, <font color=blue>The system is broke.</font color=blue> Well, that's the one absolute truth.

 

[RoyJackson]

I'll never say there's no place for class action lawsuits.

What I have a problem with is when people have a choice (in this case, the 272 lb plaintiff didn't have to eat at the Fast Foods joints).

Since 1990, these resturaunts have been posting caloric information about their goods. If one ignores that information, that's his problem...not the fast food companies.

Same thing applies with the tabbacoo. In the 60's, I'd of agreed with a law suit...but 40 years later? With all of the information, statistics that have been promulgated? I don't think so...

The major problem I have with this kind of law suit is that it removes the issues of personal responsibility. That, to me, is something contributing to the downfall of this country.

 

[unaka]

I just read this article this morning. It reminded me of a student we have at the community college where I work.
The guy in his 50's, very obese, and he's pure scum - was convicted a while back of distributing child ****. He has the attitude that because he's obese, he's disabled and we should provide a special (expensive) chair for him, not count him tardy because it takes him longer to get to class, and so on. Twice he has come to school long enough to get his Pell Grant, then drops out because of some made-up illness, only to reappear at the next registration miraculously healed. Now that he's required to pay a potion of the grant back, he's threatening to sue claiming we're denying him his rights under the disabilities act. (!)

I'm afraid this lawsuit is only the tip of the iceberg and that the next thing to happen is that obesity will be declared a disability. Think of the ramifications of that!

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Ozarker, the current system doesn't WORK period. It's run by lawyers for lawyers, and paid for by us suckers.
Running up legal fees to put small business under, Gee, Isn't that exactly what the government does? Remember the Clinton era when HUD routinely sued homeowners who opposed HUD projects?
Ever heard of a little group called IRS who just love to get some poor sucker into court where he looses 2 ways?
There is NO justice in the JUSTICE SYSTEM!!

 

[ejb]

>>At least that is what some commentator on the tube said.


Well then, someone on TV said it...it must be true....

 

[Wingnut]

loser pays is the way it works in Canada. And the other thing that's very different is that judges are appointed instead of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for a campaign to be elected.
I've seen a lot of things I thought were pretty stupid in the courts in Canada ... but there are some good things:
- lack of frivolous and junk science lawsuits (I think lawyers are still unable to do the "no fee but we'll split the proceeds" thing)
- jury system is different ... jurors are not identified nor are they permitted to discuss a case, before during or after
- the media is NOT permitted to put all the details of the case in the media until AFTER the case
- there aren't 3 million different levels of appeal courts

there've been attempts to emulate the American prediliction of class-action suits ... but the only one that I remember actually proceeding was the breast implants bit ... and I seem to recall a lot of trouble by the plaintiffs ... since they'd all signed agreements that they understand the dangers ....

Who can I sue (I'm willing to allow it to become a class action suit) because I'm disadvantaged because the country is becoming too liberal? Are there any conservative lawyers (now that Klayderman found more money on the "other side"?)