"Lawsuit abuse" costs jobs
- Thread starter alchemize
- Start date
My opinion is not set on this matter.
I like the idea of letting the people who know the facts decide what is correct awards for each case.
But it does sometimes seem that there should be some sort of minor tort reform.
some Tort reform hypocrites.
I like the idea of letting the people who know the facts decide what is correct awards for each case.
But it does sometimes seem that there should be some sort of minor tort reform.
some Tort reform hypocrites.
another excuse sanctioned by the very same idiots now talking about it. Another item for the No Sh1t Sherlock Dept.
The good news is Dave, when you vote for Kerry he'll put an end to this madness! He can't stand those sue happy lawyers.
Originally posted by: alchemize
The good news is Dave, when you vote for Kerry he'll put an end to this madness! He can't stand those sue happy lawyers.
I actually agree with you. It would be a different Madness we would be focusing are anger on. Rush and Hannity still get to keep their jobs trying to oust the "other" party again. They enjoyed the Brainwashing Bandwagon for past three years.
but democrats have clearly created this atmosphere and they always say they like jobs so this must not be true
Well, some of the population says that trial lawyers are heros but doctors are over paid. They think that the high school drop out that builds you a jeep should make the same amount as the doctor with 10 years of school who saves your kids life. That?s off topic sorry.
Yeah but the litigations need to stop. MCD (referring to McDonald's stock) gets sued left and right on the grounds that people are eating too much and getting fat. It's not like this is a bar where the bartender says you've had enough. MCD can't have someone cut you off after you?re on your 4th big mac. Ha, and than if MCD did do that they would probably get sued by a hand full of overweight people and the ACLU (another communist liberal union). Maybe what MCD needs is a pressure pad at the front entrance that locks the door if you weigh above X number of lbs.
Doesn't start here though. People are going after GM, F, and DCX because the seat belts don?t fit around their gut. So GM and the rest will have to add an extra 12' to the belt now probably. I just thought if you can't get a seatbelt around your gut that is the LAST worry you should have.
Tobacco? Leave them the hell alone. MO and RJR are having a hard enough time as it is. Don't sue them thinking that putting smoke and holding it your lugs can somehow be good for you. Goes beyond addiction. If you deem putting smoke in your body won't hurt you than, I dunno... I don't smoke, but I DON'T think it should be banned in restraints. I won't have any problems in life because I sit in non smoking. Gott'a do what's best for the company ;-)
Yeah but the litigations need to stop. MCD (referring to McDonald's stock) gets sued left and right on the grounds that people are eating too much and getting fat. It's not like this is a bar where the bartender says you've had enough. MCD can't have someone cut you off after you?re on your 4th big mac. Ha, and than if MCD did do that they would probably get sued by a hand full of overweight people and the ACLU (another communist liberal union). Maybe what MCD needs is a pressure pad at the front entrance that locks the door if you weigh above X number of lbs.
Doesn't start here though. People are going after GM, F, and DCX because the seat belts don?t fit around their gut. So GM and the rest will have to add an extra 12' to the belt now probably. I just thought if you can't get a seatbelt around your gut that is the LAST worry you should have.
Tobacco? Leave them the hell alone. MO and RJR are having a hard enough time as it is. Don't sue them thinking that putting smoke and holding it your lugs can somehow be good for you. Goes beyond addiction. If you deem putting smoke in your body won't hurt you than, I dunno... I don't smoke, but I DON'T think it should be banned in restraints. I won't have any problems in life because I sit in non smoking. Gott'a do what's best for the company ;-)
I tell you, people have stopped taking responsibility for their actions. My kid isn't stupi; I'm not a bad parent; If the coffee wasn't hot, I wouldn't have burned myself. Companies give the people too much. Many people are lazy, they don't fight for anythign except for the right to be even lazier. This should be this way. Stupid lawsuits like coffee lawsuits need to be dismissed without a question.
You ever seen Liar Liar. This women says that a burglar broke into a house and stabbed himself on a knife inside the victims kitchen, sued her for that and won. If this is true, I just can't imagine what kind of people we are electing to run with country. This is just nonsense of the 4th degree.
You ever seen Liar Liar. This women says that a burglar broke into a house and stabbed himself on a knife inside the victims kitchen, sued her for that and won. If this is true, I just can't imagine what kind of people we are electing to run with country. This is just nonsense of the 4th degree.
Vian, I hope you can come up with something better than, "if that story from the Jim Carey movie was true..." to support what you say.
Juries are just 12 people (or less for federal trials). sometimes you end up with 9 (or more) wackos that decide somebody should get paid a lot, or a company should have to pay a lot. You never hear about the rational verdicts that juries arrive at, just the ones the media decides to show you. If it bleeds (or involves a lot of money), it leads.
http://www.juryverdicts.com
Juries are just 12 people (or less for federal trials). sometimes you end up with 9 (or more) wackos that decide somebody should get paid a lot, or a company should have to pay a lot. You never hear about the rational verdicts that juries arrive at, just the ones the media decides to show you. If it bleeds (or involves a lot of money), it leads.
http://www.juryverdicts.com
Will Snow be giving us the results of the in depth study made by Treasury, or will this be more right wing whining? Oh, no in depth study? Just BALONEY opinion? Gee, I'm not surprised....
Making public policy based upon a very few unusual cases makes no sense. For the most part (like 99% of the time) lousy lawsuits get dismissed. Period. End of story.
-Robert
Making public policy based upon a very few unusual cases makes no sense. For the most part (like 99% of the time) lousy lawsuits get dismissed. Period. End of story.
-Robert
I agree with the need to stop the rediculous lawsuits, however I do believe Tobacco companies needs to disappear. Eating 15x Big Macs at McD only affects the person performing the stupidity, it doesn't harm anyone else. However, Tobacco does. Ever heard of 2nd hand smoke?
Linflas
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2001
- 15,395
- 78
- 91
Here is just one example of the nonsense lawyers are up to everyday that cost society dearly. I received in the mail yesterday a notice regarding a class action settlement by Bank of America. BA has agreed to cough up 4.2 million in protection cash to settle out of court a class action lawsuit brought against them on the classes behalf. Note that because at one time I had a credit card from BA I am automatically a part of this class unless I specifically take action to obtain a form, fill it out, and return it to these wonderful altruistic lawyers that have taken this action on my behalf. Of course out of that 4.2 million they will deduct costs of notice and administration, attorneys' fees and costs awarded by the court, and any incentive award (what ever the hell that is) ordered by the court. After a lot more lawyer language the bottom line is that Bank America is out a total of 8.4 million dollars of which at least 2.1 million is going to these ever so kind attorneys. The mob are penny ante when it comes to this stuff compared to what the legal profession manages to extort on a daily basis.
Linflas
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2001
- 15,395
- 78
- 91
Quote directly from the notice: "The lawsuit alleges that Bank of America charged some of its credit cardholders overlimit fees in specific circumstances when it should not have done so. Bank of America denies any wrongdoing and has agreed to settle this lawsuit to avoid the risk and uncertainty of litigation."
they will ALWAYS deny any wrongdoing when they settle. If you trust these large banks to do the right thing without the threat of gov't regulations or lawsuits ... then you are their perfect vict ... ummm customer.
Linflas
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2001
- 15,395
- 78
- 91
Because they are a Bank/large corporation/rich/ <insert evil capitalist wrongdoer of choice here> they are automatically guilty? That is exactly why they choose to settle out of court because they know chances are good that 12 people that think like some of you will get on a jury ready to stick it to evil corporate America.
How does it "cost society dearly" when it is BofA that has to pay money for their alleged wrong doing? You can argue that BofA customers/stockholders will have to pay for this but there is little or no cost to society as a whole.
I like how conservatives are against gov't regulation and involvement unless it is to limit something they do not like which is the power of state/federal judges and juries.
edited for typos
Originally posted by: chowderhead
How does it "cost society dearly" when it is BofA that has to pay money for their alleged wrong doing? You can argue that BofA customers/stockholders will have to pay for this but there is little or no cost to society as a whole.
I like how conservatives are against gov't regulation and involvement unless it is to limit something they do not like which is the power of state/federal judges and juries.
edited for typos
Don't forget that neo-cons are also for preson-resposiblity but not for corperate-resposiblity.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: Spencer278
Originally posted by: chowderhead
How does it "cost society dearly" when it is BofA that has to pay money for their alleged wrong doing? You can argue that BofA customers/stockholders will have to pay for this but there is little or no cost to society as a whole.
I like how conservatives are against gov't regulation and involvement unless it is to limit something they do not like which is the power of state/federal judges and juries.
edited for typos
Don't forget that neo-cons are also for preson-resposiblity but not for corperate-resposiblity.
Don't forget the corporations pay the individual's salaries. You'll understand that concept when you get a job when you grow up.
Chowderhead:
No kidding! BOA is the one costing the economy dearly. Without these lawsuits what incentive do the banks have for STOPPING THESE PRACTICES? The return to the individual cardholder is meaningless, essentially. What is most important is the deterrant effect such lawsuits have. The right wingers, including that nut job Snow, don't mention that.
This BOA example is the worst example of legal system abuses possible, because it isn't an abuse but a positive for the economy. Most of the truly bad lawsuits (I've seen quite a few.) don't even make it to the newspapers because the judges throw them out very early. You right wingers haven't even seen the worst of them and you're acting like you have some meaningful data. What BS. You don't have a clue....
I'm not prepared to turn our trial system over to the nut cases on the right wing. All they want to do is protect selected constituents. The average guy won't see a penny or realize any benefit. (If you know of a direct benefit to the average American, please detail how and when and through what process that will happen. I didn't think so....)
When you are charged with a capital crime you didn't commit and are sitting on death row ask these right wingers what they have done lately to stem prosecutorial abuses in the legal system. The answer is nothing because they don't give one whit for the common man, including all you right wingers. It is no accident they haven't made it EASIER to sue criminal enterprises and their officers, like Enron, Exxon, Dupont, Phillip Morris, ad nauseam.
Bike racers have two names for you guys. Poseurs and Rookies.
-Robert
No kidding! BOA is the one costing the economy dearly. Without these lawsuits what incentive do the banks have for STOPPING THESE PRACTICES? The return to the individual cardholder is meaningless, essentially. What is most important is the deterrant effect such lawsuits have. The right wingers, including that nut job Snow, don't mention that.
This BOA example is the worst example of legal system abuses possible, because it isn't an abuse but a positive for the economy. Most of the truly bad lawsuits (I've seen quite a few.) don't even make it to the newspapers because the judges throw them out very early. You right wingers haven't even seen the worst of them and you're acting like you have some meaningful data. What BS. You don't have a clue....
I'm not prepared to turn our trial system over to the nut cases on the right wing. All they want to do is protect selected constituents. The average guy won't see a penny or realize any benefit. (If you know of a direct benefit to the average American, please detail how and when and through what process that will happen. I didn't think so....)
When you are charged with a capital crime you didn't commit and are sitting on death row ask these right wingers what they have done lately to stem prosecutorial abuses in the legal system. The answer is nothing because they don't give one whit for the common man, including all you right wingers. It is no accident they haven't made it EASIER to sue criminal enterprises and their officers, like Enron, Exxon, Dupont, Phillip Morris, ad nauseam.
Bike racers have two names for you guys. Poseurs and Rookies.
-Robert
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter