X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:14:52 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.66] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.3) with ESMTP id 1349802 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 11:11:11 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.66; envelope-from=dskeele@bellsouth.net Received: from ibm59aec.bellsouth.net ([192.168.16.253]) by imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060826151019.IABB16267.imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm59aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 11:10:19 -0400 Received: from mail.bellsouth.net ([192.168.16.253]) by ibm59aec.bellsouth.net with SMTP id <20060826151019.OCUI21151.ibm59aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 11:10:19 -0400 X-Mailer: Openwave WebEngine, version 2.8.16.1 (webedge20-101-1106-101-20040924) X-Originating-IP: [70.149.219.46] From: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Tort X-Original-Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 11:10:18 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Original-Message-Id: <20060826151019.OCUI21151.ibm59aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Mark, Great solution.. How do we as individuals put into law ?? Ok- lets hear it from the other side....if there is one.. Don Skeele> N320J > From: "Marvin Kaye" > Date: 2006/08/26 Sat AM 10:45:02 EDT > To: "Lancair Mailing List" > Subject: [LML] Re: Tort > > > > Posted for "Mark Sletten" : > > Brent, > > I too have thought long and hard about product liability laws. It's far too > easy in our litigious society to force honorable, competent people out of > business for the sake of personal gain. > > My response has been to suggest a system such as that used in the UK - loser > pays. It's pretty simple really; the loser of the case pays all the costs of > litigation. > > It would be a self-regulating system. Lawyers considering a contingency case > will think long and hard before bringing a weak/frivolous suit if they know > they will pay the other team when they lose. In our current system there's > nothing to lose except their time. > > Likewise, lawyers of defendants with weak cases (i.e. it truly IS a faulty > product) will strongly consider settlement to avoid additional costs. This > makes it easier for those truly injured by a faulty product to recoup loses. > In the current system, the lawyer gets at least a third of any settlement - > I can see an individual negotiating his/her own settlement without legal > representation under "loser pays." Probably why US lawyers are terrified of > it... > > Either way, the number of cases actually going to court would surely > diminish! > > Mark > > > -- > For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/lml/ >