Slutty Teen accuses MYSPACE of 'not doing enough' to protect her from herself - :(

[Mr. P]

As I said, state and locally, might be honored more in the breach. I don't know. And I agree with you, such actions are more likely at those levels. That's why I wondered if panels like those in place in some jurisdictions with regard to malpractice actions might not be appropriate for some other types of cases.

Thing is, no question there are some blatantly frivolous cases, like the one spoken of at the beginning of this thread. But sometimes, from the attorney's perspective, you really don't know where a case is going til discovery is completed and you hear what the testimony/evidence of the other side is going to be. You can't just withdraw a case if your client doesn't consent and you have an obligation to represent your client diligently. So, what usually happens with garbage cases, in my experience, is that the other side makes motions to dismiss and the case gets disposed of that way. While it hurts wrongfully sued Defendants, our system tilts in favor of letting juries (or the judge if it's a bench trial) sort it all out unless there is clearly no issue of material fact for trial. :scratch:

Ok it’s late for me..But..this is the benefit of a “frivolous” test, IMO.. If there was a test, and Lawyers knew what a tort was, we wouldn’t need discovery to determine if there was a case would we? OK maybe sometimes we would. Sure judge and or jury will still have to sort stuff out. Good new is it won’t be for some MORON that spills coffee in her lap, or a Mom that can’t control her kid on the internet, or the Mom that falls over her own unruly kid then sues the store.

I guess the first and last question on this test should be “Did this person do something stupid or irresponsible?” A yes answer sends em home.

Or maybe this stuff shouldn’t even be in the realm of torts or civil action. Maybe we need a whole new area called BS suits.:teeth:

* I'm not an attorney and have NO clue WTF Im talking about*

 

[jillian]

Ok it’s late for me..But..this is the benefit of a “frivolous” test, IMO.. If there was a test, and Lawyers knew what a tort was, we wouldn’t need discovery to determine if there was a case would we? OK maybe sometimes we would. Sure judge and or jury will still have to sort stuff out. Good new is it won’t be for some MORON that spills coffee in her lap, or a Mom that can’t control her kid on the internet, or the Mom that falls over her own unruly kid then sues the store.

I guess the first and last question on this test should be “Did this person do something stupid or irresponsible?” A yes answer sends em home.

Or maybe this stuff shouldn’t even be in the realm of torts or civil action. Maybe we need a whole new area called BS suits.:teeth:

* I'm not an attorney and have NO clue WTF Im talking about*

Heh! Nah...you know your stuff

I hate that McDonald's case. I like your irresponsibility test, though.