Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-12-2011, 07:24 AM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,896 posts, read 11,980,650 times
Reputation: 7502

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt View Post
What this woman may not realize - she may end up paying the people she's suing for their costs to defend this.

And she should pay if she loses!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-12-2011, 07:38 AM
 
7,871 posts, read 10,126,178 times
Reputation: 3240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt View Post
Texas Woman Sues Continental Over Turbulent Flight | Fox News

Texas Woman Sues Continental Over Turbulent Flight

It seems her flight was bumpy and now she thinks the airlines are at fault.



sigh...
Rumors of the alleged epidemic of frivolous cases are largely exaggerated.

Just because a court entertains a kook plaintiff long enough to examine the case doesn't mean she's going to win anything.

We have a strong policy in this country to err on the side of giving people their day in court, rather than deny access to the justice system.

As it should be. At the end of the day, the kooks get what they deserve, which is usually nothing or having to pay attorneys' fees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 07:39 AM
 
7,871 posts, read 10,126,178 times
Reputation: 3240
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Yes


Unfortunately, the trial lawyer's association owns the democratic party, so there will never be any tort reform with the dems in control. They don't want to bite the hand that feeds them.
And the insurance companies own the GOP.

Better to err on the side of access to the courts, and make them pay when the case is determined to be frivolous.

The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do grind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 07:40 AM
 
7,871 posts, read 10,126,178 times
Reputation: 3240
Quote:
Originally Posted by cremebrulee View Post
YES, it's about damn time!!!! Thanks so much for sharing this! Every single state should follow along with this!!!!
They already do.

\


EVERY state has provisions for attorneys' fees and costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 09:59 AM
 
30,058 posts, read 18,650,451 times
Reputation: 20860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel View Post
And the insurance companies own the GOP.

Better to err on the side of access to the courts, and make them pay when the case is determined to be frivolous.

The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they do grind.

Every ONE deserves a day in court if they have been injured or harmed. But a collective, such as the trial lawyer's association, via class action suits, has turned the justice system into a piracy system. Class action suits benefit only the attorneys and is modern piracy.

If one is on the side of the trial lawyer's association and rationalizing thier actions, perhaps one should re-examine the basis of thier political thoughts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 10:34 AM
 
3,045 posts, read 3,191,740 times
Reputation: 1307
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Yes


Unfortunately, the trial lawyer's association owns the democratic party, so there will never be any tort reform with the dems in control. They don't want to bite the hand that feeds them.
Oh please. Stop being a drama queen. Republicans and big business use as many lawyers as anyone else. Why should any of you care about a lawsuit being filed. That doesn't mean they'll win and it generally costs them money.

Incidentally, by tort reform, those funded by big corporations mean taking away the little guys ability to have any recourse against big business. That doesn't mean getting rid of frivolous lawsuits, but getting rid of ALL lawsuits. Sadly, so many people here lack the intelligence to realize this.

Carry on with your childish emotions and poorly founded opinions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 10:52 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,469,405 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel View Post
Rumors of the alleged epidemic of frivolous cases are largely exaggerated.

Just because a court entertains a kook plaintiff long enough to examine the case doesn't mean she's going to win anything.

We have a strong policy in this country to err on the side of giving people their day in court, rather than deny access to the justice system.

As it should be. At the end of the day, the kooks get what they deserve, which is usually nothing or having to pay attorneys' fees.
oh please

1000's of other frivious lawsuits out there::

Woman claims a bad hair treatment at a salon was enough to cause her emotional distress, depression and to "shut down" so much that she was caused to retire early from her university teaching job and a side job -- and the jury buys it!

Man uses restroom stall in city building that doesn't have a door knob. When he sticks his hand through the hole, he gets hurt -- and, of course, sues. He wins almost $3 million. His occupation? City claims examiner.

Man sues fast food chain over its too-hot onion rings

Attorney cleaning his pool decides to knock palm frond from overhead electrical wires. When he's quite naturally electrocuted, his wife knows who's to blame: the electric company and the company who sold him the pool skimmer, of course

Musician sued for copyright infringement because he tongue-in-cheekily attributed a blank section of an album to another musician. "I certainly wasn't quoting his silence," he said. "I claim my silence is original silence." Perhaps in the world of lawsuits, such a claim makes some sort of logical sense.

Adult gets drunk at party, drives away and is killed in car crash. Who's to blame? Not the drunk: His girlfriend, for allegedly letting him drive. His girlfriend's mother, for buying the car for her daughter. The owner of the house the party was in, even though he wasn't there. The girl who rented the house from him. Oh, yeah: and Coors Brewing Co., who made the beer

Man says he is having heart attacks and got diabetes because he's obese. Why is he obese? Because McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's and KFC failed to tell him that he shouldn't eat their fast food multiple times per week

Professional big game hunter goes on safari and shoots a lion. It didn't drop dead immediately since he was loaded for rhino and hippo, not lion, and he's mauled. Whose fault is it that the "professional" hunter has the wrong ammo? Why, the ammo manufacturer, of course! He sues.

Driver, fearing she is about to step in front of him, stops for jay-walking pedestrian. When she passes in front of his vehicle and steps into the next lane without looking, she is hit and severely injured by another car. Who's at fault? The driver who stopped, of course! Her parents' lawsuit is thrown out, but an appeals court restores the case.

Man hit by lightning in parking lot. A classic "act of God"? Heavens no! It's the fault of the amusement park that owns the lot, man says in his lawsuit -- they "could have told the people not to go to their cars," his lawyer says

Woman broken down in her car in a public place decides not to wait for the tow truck to take her on a 60-mile jaunt. Instead, she takes a ride with a stranger -- who rapes and murders her. Yeah yeah, he's caught and convicted, but surely someone needs to pay. How about the auto club?

Woman sues after a car wreck, claiming the auto manufacturer was at fault because it "failed to provide instructions regarding the safe and proper use of a seatbelt."

After an accident, transit authority discovers its driver is color-blind. Federal law requires commercial drivers to correctly see color, so he is pressured to resign. That's not the end, though: he sues, claiming "discrimination" against color-blind people -- even though he claims he is not color-blind.

Huge toy company sues huge record company -- a singer dared to sing a parody about the Barbie doll. Since "Barbie" is a registered trademark, Mattel considers the word their property, and they can stop anyone else from uttering it or disparaging it.

TV Show 60 Minutes does segment on how a certain area of Mississippi has gone lawsuit crazy . Two jurors who were never named in the broadcast take exception to the criticism and sue the show -- for $6 billion.

Man goes berzerk after his dog gets lost, spending over $20,000 on pet "psychics" and other "professionals" to find the stray he had found on the street. Meanwhile, he let his business collapse so he could spend full time on the search. And who's at fault for all of this? His pet-sitter. He sues her for $160,000.

Frat brother goes to party at frat house, gets drunk, and decides that a shallow pool of water would be a good place to do a belly flop. When he breaks his neck doing it, he sues the fraternity for $25 million. Maybe he should have known better: he was a certified lifeguard!


Woman picks doctor out of the phone book to do her liposuction. When she has complications, she says she never would have chosen that doctor had she known he wasn't Board Certified in the procedure. (She believed the phonebook over asking the doctor, or looking for a certificate on his wall?!) So she sues ...the phone company. And wins.

Woman's check for car insurance bounces, so her policy is canceled -- yet she sues them demanding they cover her damages in an accident, and wins!

Daycare owner is mowing lawn, and drives over young boy, killing him. His parents, however, don't sue the daycare operator since they have only $100,000 of insurance; instead, they sue ...the lawnmower manufacturer! And win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 10:57 AM
 
14,247 posts, read 17,913,622 times
Reputation: 13807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkatt View Post
What this woman may not realize - she may end up paying the people she's suing for their costs to defend this.
Good for Perry (did I really say that ).

People need to understand that there are consequences to their actions. If they are personally liable for the costs of a case - including those of the defendants - then they might think twice.

In fact, I would take it a step further. Where attorneys work on a contingency basis, they should be liable for a percentage of the costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:00 AM
 
13,648 posts, read 20,766,078 times
Reputation: 7650
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
When you live in a society where 'someone else' is always to blame,this is what you get.
Post of the Day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:39 AM
 
7,871 posts, read 10,126,178 times
Reputation: 3240
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Every ONE deserves a day in court if they have been injured or harmed. But a collective, such as the trial lawyer's association

LOL

As a trial lawyer, I can safely relate to you that they are nothing at all like a "collective."

Does every comment you make have to be so steeped in ideology?

Quote:
, via class action suits, has turned the justice system into a piracy system.
Like I said, this allegation is GREATLY exaggerated. Much like how the infamous McDonald's coffee burn case was utterly distorted in the right wing media into something it never was.

Quote:
Class action suits benefit only the attorneys and is modern piracy.
Tell it to your legislature, then. They write the rules.


Quote:
If one is on the side of the trial lawyer's association and rationalizing thier actions, perhaps one should re-examine the basis of thier political thoughts.
<shrug>

I don't care about what they want, all I know is that it is a good thing to allow access to the courts, and the size of your pocketbook should not preclude you from that access. Hence contingency fees. Hence class actions.

There are negative side effects, of course, but that's why we have judges and jury instructions. People outside the system have a very distorted and incorrect view of how it works - and those forces in whose interest it is to limit access to the courts take great advantage of your ignorance.

The trial lawyers associations (and I don't belong to any of them), just like any trade association, argues in its best interests. So what. Docs and pharmacists and real estate brokers do the same thing.

Just wondering, but how exactly does a court determine a case is frivolous without first examining at least some evidence?

Eh?

There is a process that has to be observed. The system is by no means perfect, but it works far better than is generally believed by lay people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:47 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top