You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What exactly is "tort reform". Please explain with facts. Thank you for not
- Thread starter Froggy
- Start date
§§pecial Unicorn™
New member
Redefining the limits in injury lawsuits and putting some logic into how much and if money is awarded. America is sue-happy because they know the courts will force the deep pockets (companies) to pay you for your pain and suffering, injury or pay your family for your death. While many of these suits DO have merit, so many more are without any whatsoever and are allowed to be judged often by a jury on emotion only. And if not that--a judge simply following the precedent of those suits and their outcomes. If you slip on the floor and break your ankle due to negligence of a company--I don't think it warrants you getting millions from them. Real negligence and injury gets lost in this scheme. And it is a scheme. Ambulance chasing lawyers make their living this way. (and every one around them benefits) But....Congress is NOT interested in this avenue as most of them are lawyers. Keep in mind...huge payments in settlements accomplish only one thing....higher costs to you to pick up the tab, even if you run them out of business. The next company will pad their profit to keep the kitty full in case of such instances.
American Dreamer
New member
It's basically the idea that tort laws (civil laws regarding compensation for injury to the person) favor plaintiffs too much. Tort reform efforts are typically fueled by isolated cases involving extremely high damages awards for seemingly minor injuries, such as the McDonald's coffee case, depicted in the media.
American Dreamer
New member
It's basically the idea that tort laws (civil laws regarding compensation for injury to the person) favor plaintiffs too much. Tort reform efforts are typically fueled by isolated cases involving extremely high damages awards for seemingly minor injuries, such as the McDonald's coffee case, depicted in the media.
Tort reform is essentially eliminating frivolous law suits.
One measure that could be taken is implementing "loser pays." Presently, or system is set up that anyone can sue a medical practitioner for anything. A law firm can be engaged and paid with tax dollars regardless of the merits of the case. Most of time, insurance companies will settle out of court to avoid the legal fees. Either way, the lawyers are paid. It was set up that way, on the surface, "to protect the little guy from the fat cat corporations." It was actually the trial lawyer "full employment act."
Implementing "Loser pays" will eliminate all frivolous law suits over nite. The lawyer will not take the case unless he'll be paid.
Other forms of reform are eliminating "jackpot lawsuits."
Here is an example of a frivolous law suit...not a medical one, but along the lines that doctors get sued.
"Lady sues McDonald's for broken coccyx for big money (over 1 million). The gist of the story is the lady sued McDonald's because she slipped on a spilled drink and broke her tailbone. The specifics of it are, moments before she slipped, she threw the drink at her boy friend. In the process of storming out...she slipped in the puddle.
Most doctors do pro bona work. They have to by law. There is a certain time of the year when a certain group comes into the emergency room for cuts and lacerations. This group is illegally in the US and don't pay for medical care received. This is where many of the malpractice lawsuits are coming from. The lawyers representing these unfortunate people seek huge rewards (aka. "jackpot"). See it this way, "Party A is dependent upon his hands for a living. Dr. X could not repair his hand to party A's satisfaction. Dr. X is a wealthy fat cat, poor party A is a laborer. We seek X million dollars." The courts often grant the award. It's all play money.
One measure that could be taken is implementing "loser pays." Presently, or system is set up that anyone can sue a medical practitioner for anything. A law firm can be engaged and paid with tax dollars regardless of the merits of the case. Most of time, insurance companies will settle out of court to avoid the legal fees. Either way, the lawyers are paid. It was set up that way, on the surface, "to protect the little guy from the fat cat corporations." It was actually the trial lawyer "full employment act."
Implementing "Loser pays" will eliminate all frivolous law suits over nite. The lawyer will not take the case unless he'll be paid.
Other forms of reform are eliminating "jackpot lawsuits."
Here is an example of a frivolous law suit...not a medical one, but along the lines that doctors get sued.
"Lady sues McDonald's for broken coccyx for big money (over 1 million). The gist of the story is the lady sued McDonald's because she slipped on a spilled drink and broke her tailbone. The specifics of it are, moments before she slipped, she threw the drink at her boy friend. In the process of storming out...she slipped in the puddle.
Most doctors do pro bona work. They have to by law. There is a certain time of the year when a certain group comes into the emergency room for cuts and lacerations. This group is illegally in the US and don't pay for medical care received. This is where many of the malpractice lawsuits are coming from. The lawyers representing these unfortunate people seek huge rewards (aka. "jackpot"). See it this way, "Party A is dependent upon his hands for a living. Dr. X could not repair his hand to party A's satisfaction. Dr. X is a wealthy fat cat, poor party A is a laborer. We seek X million dollars." The courts often grant the award. It's all play money.