Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
quote:
you surely do seem to feel everyone is out to sue someone. my munchkin had a desk hurled at her that barely missed and was also threatened by another child about bringing a gun and shooting her--again, no lawsuit. that was 1st grade. shall i go on?
so many people scream "tort reform" when it's not really as prevalent as some think. it's time to get off the "everyone is suing everyone" bandwagon as it's an echo you're hearing
I live in the same state. It's not my opinion it's a pragmatic observation based upon facts. Your decision regarding your daughter was yours. Unfortunately, based upon actual cost, you seem to be in the minority. A recent study sites that 65% of all litigation against California schools was a liability case. In California $13.18 per student is spent on civil liability cases. Los Angeles County spent $31.42/student.
The report makes interesting reading, citing actual cases. Cleanser used to clean up vomit caused a child to feel nauseated. The mother subsequently claimed the nausea turned into asthma. An attorney filed a claim for $30,000 in damages. In discovery it was determined that the child had a long history of asthma. This occurred in the same district in which a girl sued for sunburn, caused by 20 minute physical education class held on a sunny day.
In Illinois two band students protested receiving an "F" for inserting their own guitar solos into a concert. Their attorney argued that their civil rights were violated. The school district incurred costs of the litigation that extended all the way to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
In San Diego a school spent $22,000 defending a civil rights lawsuit an attorney brought on behalf of a 16 year old girl found carrying 3 knives.
$400,000 of your tax dollars were spent to settle a case brought by an attorney on behalf of a 16 year old truant student who was struck by a car off campus after a school employee asked the student and his friends to return to school.
Entire Report: http://www.cjac.org/research/schoolreport.pdf
The public didn't create the current low esteem held by many regarding the legal industry. The actions of the industry, perpetuated by the disproportionate number of attorneys elected to public office, generate the sentiment. Why do they seek public office? Unlike a business person who can't just let his business run itself, attorneys can still maintain their practice. Their time in elected office is an investment for future lobbying jobs. Meanwhile, they make sure their industry is protected and enhanced.
Prop 64 in California is a perfect example of the fight the legal industry puts on with even the slightest inclination that true tort reform is on the horizon. It's a "fixed game". If industry puts up any campaign they are represented as being oppressive of the general publics "right" to sue. Yet it's the same general public who must pay the cost, approximate 20% of each and every consumer item, which goes to liability insurance and payout of civil suits. It's the general public who's factories are closed because a company such as Piper Cub can't afford to build planes in the US because the liability insurance was determined to be 150% of the cost of the materials and man-hours it took to build the plane.
Other than the reason that it would end frivolous lawsuits, there is no logical reason why a "loser pays all legal costs" tort reform isn't law in the US. The injured would still prevail, the incompetent would still pay. Lawyers wouldn't be able to take the cavalier attitude to bring cases. They'd have to consider their validity. The "lottery", where it doesn't cost anything to play on the plaintiff side, would be over.
Currently, instead of "winning" a case and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in defense most defendants settle. Analysis isn't whether the case has merits or not. The decision is based on whether the cost of the defense will be more than what the plaintiff is asking. How is "justice" being served? Wonder why schools and companies in general settle versus go to jury trial. Here are the Top ten jury verdicts of 2005 as reported by the Lawyers Weekly.
quote:
TOP TEN JURY VERDICTS IN 2005
#1
Billionaire Investor Awarded $1.45 Billion In Fraud Suit Against Morgan Stanley
In 2005's largest verdict to an individual plaintiff, a Florida jury last May ordered Morgan Stanley to pay $1.45 billion to investor Ronald O. Perelman for defrauding him in the sale of his Coleman camping gear company.
#2
Overdose Of Chemotherapy Meds Leads To $606 Million Verdict
In what may be one of the last massive medical malpractice verdicts in Texas, a state jury awarded $606 million - including a remarkable $600 million in punitive damages - to the family of an 82-year-old cancer patient who died after receiving an overdose of chemotherapy drugs.
#3
Texas Jury Awards $253 Million In First Vioxx Trial
Plaintiffs scored a major victory in the ongoing Vioxx litigation last August when a Texas jury awarded $253.1 million in the first trial.
#4
High-Low Agreement Slashes $164 Million Verdict To $5 Million
Moments before a Florida jury returned with its $164 million verdict last July, plaintiffs' attorney Arthur Tifford agreed to a high-low agreement that capped the defendant's liability at $5 million.
#5
Giants Stadium Beer Vendor Held Liable In $135 Million Auto Accident Case
In the largest liquor liability verdict in the nation, a New Jersey jury last January found the beer concession at Giants Stadium in New York liable for a drunken football fan who caused a car crash that paralyzed a 2-year-old girl.
#6
Small Entertainment Promoter Wins $90 Million Verdict Against Industry Giant
In a David and Goliath type tale, an Illinois jury awarded an events promoter $90 million - most of it in punitive damages - against one of the nation's largest entertainment promoters, Clear Channel Communications of Chicago.
#7
Law Firm, Bank Must Pay $65.5M To Widow In Estate Planning Case
In February, a prominent Houston-based law firm and a Texas bank were slammed with a $65.5 million verdict in a complex estate planning case that involved major conflicts of interest.
#8
$65 Million For Sixth-Grader Electrocuted At Bus Stop
Three years after a jury acquitted a Florida company of criminal manslaughter charges, a civil jury hit the outdoor advertiser with a $65 million verdict for the electrocution of a sixth-grade boy.
#9
Private Jet Pilot Wins $64 Million For Age Discrimination
In early December, a Los Angeles jury found that PrivatAir - an aviation company specializing in private airline services - wrongfully terminated Captain Doyle D. Baker on the basis of his age, defaming him in the process and causing extreme emotional distress.
#10
Family Wins $61.2M In Ford Explorer Rollover
In the ninth loss for Ford in Explorer rollover cases, a Florida jury awarded $61.2 million to the parents of an 18-year-old boy who was killed in a 1997
http://www.lawyersweeklyusa.com/topten2005.cfm
|
RE: Why can't people see ? - 
Profile
M 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread