From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: Tort
To: lml
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 10:30:09 -0400
Message-ID: <web-1350941@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <D456AE772BC43B468CB782B29279CC332B33E5@sdf1.mail.taturbo.com>
References: <D456AE772BC43B468CB782B29279CC332B33E5@sdf1.mail.taturbo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1";format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit


Posted for "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>:

  Mark,
  
  Re: Loser pays.
  
  Think about it for a moment.
  
  Why do we not have that?
  
  All of the state legislatures around the country have distinct
  minorities who are lawyers - - so it is not the lawyers keeping that
  from happening.
  
  So why not?
  
  There is a simple answer.
  
  The simple answer is that the huge insurance industry opposes it.
  
  Why?  Because right now,  when a plaintiff with a meritorious case
  brings the case,  the insurance industry  can defend the devil out of
  the case with no adverse consequences - - and force the case to settle
  somewhere short of trial and short of a full measure of compensation for
  the injured party.
  
  You may not believe this - - but the vast majority of cases filed by
  lawyers representing injured people are "meritorious".
  
  In a loser pays system - - many fewer of those cases would be settled as
  there would be every incentive for the plaintiff lawyers to take them to
  trial.
  
  Leaving aside the rather infrequent but highly publicized "unusual"
  cases - - lawyers who file tort cases make a living by filing cases that
  they have carefully evaluated and believe have merit under the laws the
  legislatures have passed.  The lawyers end up providing substantial
  amounts of money to pay for the ongoing costs of the litigation.  Unless
  they are damn fools - - they don't do that for cases that are unlikely
  to be successful.
  
  Regards  George
  
  PS.  In the last couple of years I have provided the defense for at
  least seven aviation entities who should not have been sued. So far,
  they have all been released from that litigation with reasonable  effort
  that was not inexpensive, but neither was it a disaster for the parties.
  
  
  It is a problem in some cases - - because until they get into the middle
  of the case,  it is often difficult for the plaintiff's lawyer  to
  figure out who is really the problem and who is not.  We could use some
  serious "reform" in this area to make it possible to protect the statute
  of limitations without requiring a person to file a lawsuit.  That would
  eliminate the necessity to name everybody whose name appears in the
  maintenance log books out of fear that something was being overlooked in
  the investigation.