Tort Reform

[WatertheTree]

tort/tôrt/
Noun: A wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to legal liability.

There is alot of buzz recently about tort reform, although most people, I suspect, do not know what tort reform means. Most people have a misconception that tort reform exists put an end to frivolous lawsuits and thusly clean out the courts and help the economy. This is somewhat of a fallacy not because they are false, but because these effects are merely the side effect of tort reforms true intent.

The intent of tort reform is to put limitations in place on class action lawsuits. These are the types of lawsuits that protect the general public from say a lumber mill leaking mercury into a towns water supply, or an insurance company that refuses to authorize needed treatment. Men have died to ensure us the right for a jury to decide who is at fault and just as important the compensation.

Lobbiests in Washington (there are eight of them for every 1 representative) are working hard to use the government to protect them from being sued. Rick Perry mentioned tort reform just tonight on the debat. One the surface it sounds great, but whats going on is power is trying to hide from the public whats really going on.

Wouldnt a better way to help the economy and clean out the courts be to build more courts?

 

[jillian]

on the surface, it doesn't look great. on the surface it looks like it destroys the rights of plaintiffs. and it's not just class actions, it's every type of suit against corporations for injuries they cause.

my feeling is when they limit the damage they can cause, i'll be pleased to see their liability limited.

not to mention the fact that the concept of 'tort reform' is based on lie after lie...

 

[Sallow]

Tort reform..oh gosh.

 

[WatertheTree]

With a couple of candidates touting tort reform as part of their platform I would think the erosion of civil liberties and the bill of rights would spark more debate.

Oh wait, this is America, were so special we dont need the rule of law to protect us from our government.

 

[WatertheTree]

With such little support for the erosion of our rights and the enslavement of us all how is it possible that a 'front runner' like Rick Perry touts tort reform as a good thing?

 

[GeanieT]

Hi, I’m from Oklahoma. Our last Tort Reform o 2009, not only put some of the lowest caps on, but unless you have a class action suit, attorney fees are no longer recoverable from the losing side. And Tort Reform changes are a One Size Fits All, no deviation unless it’s a class action suit.
I currently have a suit against the City of Broken Arrow, who in their lame efforts to divert flood waters from 2 newly developed areas, diverted massive amounts of flood waters to our property/home and repeatedly flooded us for 4 yeas until they installed a real storm drainage system in Jan of this year.
Estimated cost of repairs is over $98,600. In June the City asked us to submit a pretrial settlement amount. We asked for the exact cost of the repairs. Our offer was rejected and the City stated their intent to take this to trail.
The only reason they are selecting to go to trial is due to attorney fees no longer being recoverable, in this type of case. So we cannot hope to obtain an attorney on a contingency basis, and since we don’t have the estimated $25,000 to go to trial just lying around, we cannot go to trial. This will result in our case being dismissed, the City will be able to slither away unscathed and we will be left paying a mortgage on a $150,000 home which recently appraised for $20,000. And btw, my husband and I are nearing 60 years old.
Tort Reform does not do as it was intended, or does it? It certainly does reduce costs to BIG BUSINESS, DOCTORS AND INSURANCE companies…. but it ties the hands of the hard working citizen who has a legitimate case.

 

[martybegan]

on the surface, it doesn't look great. on the surface it looks like it destroys the rights of plaintiffs. and it's not just class actions, it's every type of suit against corporations for injuries they cause.

my feeling is when they limit the damage they can cause, i'll be pleased to see their liability limited.

not to mention the fact that the concept of 'tort reform' is based on lie after lie...

One example of something that is not based on a lie is reforming New York's Scaffold law.

Based on this law some guy does not follow site regulations, falls 25 feet, survives, gets workman's comp, but sues everyone except the company employing him, under the scaffold law, and gets a 7 figure settlement.

Is that how our legal system is supposed to work?