Torvy
Super Member
Simple. We just need tort reform. 1) We have a messed up idea of juries. If I sue company A for injury while using their products, the jury is typically a bunch of consumers. Since the concept is supposed to protect the defense (company A in this case), the jury should be made up of officials from similar types of companies. Medical malpractice heard by a jury of medical professionals, etc. 2) There is nothing to dissuade lawyers or consumers from filing frivolous suits. I'd change the law to prohibit lawyers getting a %. Also, the value of the suit should never be able to exceed demonstrable losses (Maybe + 10%). Any punitive monies should go to the state of jurisdiction, not to the plaintiffs or the attorneys. I'd also make every plaintiff liable to pay substantial penalties if they lose. Maybe not 100% loser pays, but at least proportional to the assets of the parties. Attorneys who repeatedly file frivolous suits should have license suspension for a year, longer if egregious.While I certainly agree with you in theory, the idiots who do successfully or unsuccessfully sue the manufacturers cost the manufacturer's money which in turn gets passed on to us the consumers so we end up paying for their stupidity. Then those same idiots use the local state Medicaid and go on disability for their injury and again we as the taxpayers end up footing the bill.
I am very much anti-nanny state and like most of the folks here these types of laws are bad for our collective blood pressure. Don't know what a good solution is, maybe more robust protection for manufacturers from idiot misuse of their products
Ever since Lawyers could advertise (1977 Scotus case), suit have been increasing. Lawsuits are seen as a way to profit rather than simple justice.