Should states be allowed to interfer in lawsuits?

[shintao]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

 

[The Rabbi]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

Not surprisingly your threat title does not reflect the substance.
Government has not overstepped its authority. Setting damages is within the purview of gov't authority.
Unlimited caps is beloved only of gold diggers and lawyers.
Hurray for TN, one of the best states in the nation!

 

[jillian]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

it's not government eclipsing it's authority. it's the "small government" hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate... which is companies damaging others.

i'm opposed to limiting liability until defendants limit the damage they cause by their negligence.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Here's a link to the article for non-mobile phone users. (I just removed the "m" in the URL):
Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » The Commercial Appeal

It caps "NON-ECONOMIC" and punitive damage awards in personal injury and healthcare malpractice lawsuits. Non-economic losses are injuries difficult to quantify financially, like pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life. Awards will be capped at $750,000 in most cases and $1 million when victims suffer spinal-cord injuries that lead to loss of use of two or more limbs.

Economic damages, which reimburse victims for actual costs like medical care and loss of income, ARE NOT CAPPED. Punitive damage awards are capped at two times compensatory damages or $500,000, whichever is greater, and the legal standards of proving punitive damages are raised.

Sounds ok to me, for the reasons already outlined by The Rabbi.

 

[The Rabbi]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

it's not government eclipsing it's authority. it's the "small government" hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate... which is companies damaging others.

i'm opposed to limiting liability until defendants limit the damage they cause by their negligence.

This isn't a regulation. It's a law. Surely you know the difference, "counselor."
There is no limit on the amount available to cover actual damage. This is typical puke spewed out by the lawyers' lobby. And no, they will not make a lawyer just because you suck their weiner, "counselor".

 

[Vanquish]

it's not government eclipsing it's authority. it's the "small government" hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate... which is companies damaging others.

I'm opposed to limiting liability until defendants limit the damage they cause by their negligence.

I do agree that this is an example of hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate.

That being said...the government isn't overstepping it's bounds. Each state is allowed to limit damage awards and that's just the way it is.

I think there needs to be a fine balance between limiting damages and consumer protections. Said another way - we need to have a system where catastrophic injuries ARE compensated when they happen...but that lottery-ticket justice doesnt hand everyone too much money and abuse the system.

I happen to be a lawyer who does PI cases and I can tell you, tort reform has both pros and cons.

 

[Mad Scientist]

it's not government eclipsing it's authority. it's the "small government" hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate... which is companies damaging others.

I'm opposed to limiting liability until defendants limit the damage they cause by their negligence.

I do agree that this is an example of hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate.

That being said...the government isn't overstepping it's bounds. Each state is allowed to limit damage awards and that's just the way it is.

I think there needs to be a fine balance between limiting damages and consumer protections. Said another way - we need to have a system where catastrophic injuries ARE compensated when they happen...but that lottery-ticket justice doesnt hand everyone too much money and abuse the system.

I happen to be a lawyer who does PI cases and I can tell you, tort reform has both pros and cons.

Please elaborate.

 

[Vanquish]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

it's not government eclipsing it's authority. it's the "small government" hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate... which is companies damaging others.

i'm opposed to limiting liability until defendants limit the damage they cause by their negligence.

This isn't a regulation. It's a law. Surely you know the difference, "counselor."
There is no limit on the amount available to cover actual damage. This is typical puke spewed out by the lawyers' lobby. And no, they will not make a lawyer just because you suck their weiner, "counselor".

You're right and wrong at the same time.

Yes, regulations are different than laws. Congress enacts laws, while regulations are the rules of executive agencies, written to implement the authority of laws.

Where you're wrong is that colloquially or informally people in debates and discussions refer to laws erroneously as regulations. So there you go...

The point made was still a valid one. Republicans limit the shit they hate...then tag liberals for doing the same. It's a tired ass conservative trope, but it does exist. Conservatives say liberals want too many regulations. Liberals say conservatives want too few regulations.

And here we have conservatives trying to limit (regulate, colloqially...really legislate) how much those terrible PI lawyers can get awards for.

 

[whitehall]

It's like asking if the states should interfere in drug use? The so-called "lawsuits" you refer to are based on Civil law. Like criminal law civil law is based on State and federal statutes. Far from "interfering" in civil suits states regulate the practice of civil law and license lawyers to practice.

 

[The Rabbi]

it's not government eclipsing it's authority. it's the "small government" hypocrites hating regulation unless it regulates what they hate... which is companies damaging others.

i'm opposed to limiting liability until defendants limit the damage they cause by their negligence.

This isn't a regulation. It's a law. Surely you know the difference, "counselor."
There is no limit on the amount available to cover actual damage. This is typical puke spewed out by the lawyers' lobby. And no, they will not make a lawyer just because you suck their weiner, "counselor".

You're right and wrong at the same time.

Yes, regulations are different than laws. Congress enacts laws, while regulations are the rules of executive agencies, written to implement the authority of laws.

Where you're wrong is that colloquially or informally people in debates and discussions refer to laws erroneously as regulations. So there you go...

The point made was still a valid one. Republicans limit the shit they hate...then tag liberals for doing the same. It's a tired ass conservative trope, but it does exist. Conservatives say liberals want too many regulations. Liberals say conservatives want too few regulations.

And here we have conservatives trying to limit (regulate, colloqially...really legislate) how much those terrible PI lawyers can get awards for.

I dont care what people commonly and erroneously say. There is an important distinction: Regulations are issued by people not answerable to anyone. Laws are passed by elected officials who can be punished at the ballot box.
It is not an example of Republican hypocrisy. First off, as mentioned it was done by people who are accountable. Secondly, it is well within the scope of state government powers. Thirdly, it does not put anyone out of business, even trial lawyers. Finally it tilts the balance of justice back towards defendents in suits, where juries have often bought into the class warfare rap and seek to punish companies, who often in return make their goods and services unavailable to those same jurors and their kin.
Tort reform has been a GOP cornerstone for some time. There is no hypocrisy, except among plaintiff's attorneys who pretend their opposition stems from some kind of altruism.

 

[shintao]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

Not surprisingly your threat title does not reflect the substance.

Undenialably a confused con who doesn't recognize government interference when faced with it.

Government has not overstepped its authority. Setting damages is within the purview of gov't authority.

While setting damages is an assumed authority, it has no business doing so. A state could decide to make everyone wear red on Friday, having the authority to do so, yet abusing their powers, or have you never met a law you didn't like?

Unlimited caps is beloved only of gold diggers and lawyers.
Hurray for TN, one of the best states in the nation!

Unlimited caps is less government interference and more freedom. Something a con would hesitate in giving an American.

 

[The Rabbi]

Tennessee House gives final approval to far-reaching bill capping personal-injury damage awards, imposing other restrictions on civil liability lawsuits and curtailing the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.

Tennessee House gives final approval to bill capping personal-injury damage awards » Memphis Commercial Appeal Mobile



I appose capping lawsuits on many grounds, from government overstepping their authority, to injustice to victims when law is supposed to be balanced and fair.

Not surprisingly your threat title does not reflect the substance.


Government has not overstepped its authority. Setting damages is within the purview of gov't authority.

While setting damages is an assumed authority, it has no business doing so. A state could decide to make everyone wear red on Friday, having the authority to do so, yet abusing their powers, or have you never met a law you didn't like?

Unlimited caps is beloved only of gold diggers and lawyers.
Hurray for TN, one of the best states in the nation!

Unlimited caps is less government interference and more freedom. Something a con would hesitate in giving an American.

Thats like saying legalizing rape gives men more freedom and less gov't interference.
You fail.