Wonder why TORT reform is an issue?

[DamnYankee]

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, What’s the Most Frivolous Lawsuit of All?

A California restaurant has been sued because one of its bathroom mirrors was two inches too high.

After the original mirror was vandalized, restaurant owner Ron Piazza replaced it with a new mirror that was set two inches higher than the old one, allegedly in non-compliance with California’s disabilities laws. Before Piazza became aware of and corrected the mistake, three plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit claim to have visited the restaurant a total of 27 times over a three-month period and allege that they suffered damages on each visit.

“It would have been very easy for them to let us know that the mirror was a couple of inches too high, and we could have taken care of that right away,” Piazza said. “Had I not lowered the mirror, they probably would have continued to come and log more visits … It’s very clear to me that they were instructed by someone who really knew the law on how many times to visit, what to look for.”

Thanks to a new national campaign sponsored by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform called “Faces of Lawsuit Abuse,” Piazza’s story is being told to highlight abusive lawsuits and the impact on small businesses, many of which are family -- or locally --owned.

“Abuse lawsuits are not victimless,” said ILR President Lisa Rickard. “Many people think big-dollar lawsuits are only filed against ‘deep pocket’ corporations. Yet, in this current economic climate, many locally-owned businesses like Ron Piazza’s are just one lawsuit away from closing their doors.”

To learn more about Faces of Lawsuit Abuse and to view a short video of Piazza’s story, visit Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org.

—Source: Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org

[Posted April 16, 2009]

 

[editec]

Stupid laws are bad.

We ought to fix them.

duh!

 

[garyd]

Tell it to the Democrats they pass most of them in order to enrich the trial lawyers who give 8 dollars in ten to Democrat office holders campaign funds.

 

[jillian]

Tell it to the Democrats they pass most of them in order to enrich the trial lawyers who give 8 dollars in ten to Democrat office holders campaign funds.

noooooooooooo we shouldn't have any ability to sue... that way corporatists can operate unchecked ...

bad laws should be changed. rational people understand that.

you however simply miss no opportunity to flail about without an ounce of actual understanding.

 

[garyd]

Jillian we are not talking about the aqbility to sue though their clearly should be some limits. What person in their right minds thinks the court system ought to be clogged with suits such as the one beginning the thread over the heighth of bathroom mirrors?

 

[jillian]

there are already meachanisms in place for abuse of the system. cases that are meritless can be dismissed and the parties brining them sanctioned.

how would you suggest you weed out frivolous cases in ADVANCE of their filing? you know, BEFORE a judge hears it?

 

[editec]

Hey we've got some dirty bathwater so let's just throw it, and the baby in it , out with the bath, shall we?

Tort reform?

Why not just reform the laws that are stupid?

 

[RoadVirus]

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, What’s the Most Frivolous Lawsuit of All?

A California restaurant has been sued because one of its bathroom mirrors was two inches too high.

After the original mirror was vandalized, restaurant owner Ron Piazza replaced it with a new mirror that was set two inches higher than the old one, allegedly in non-compliance with California’s disabilities laws. Before Piazza became aware of and corrected the mistake, three plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit claim to have visited the restaurant a total of 27 times over a three-month period and allege that they suffered damages on each visit.

“It would have been very easy for them to let us know that the mirror was a couple of inches too high, and we could have taken care of that right away,” Piazza said. “Had I not lowered the mirror, they probably would have continued to come and log more visits … It’s very clear to me that they were instructed by someone who really knew the law on how many times to visit, what to look for.”

Thanks to a new national campaign sponsored by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform called “Faces of Lawsuit Abuse,” Piazza’s story is being told to highlight abusive lawsuits and the impact on small businesses, many of which are family -- or locally --owned.

“Abuse lawsuits are not victimless,” said ILR President Lisa Rickard. “Many people think big-dollar lawsuits are only filed against ‘deep pocket’ corporations. Yet, in this current economic climate, many locally-owned businesses like Ron Piazza’s are just one lawsuit away from closing their doors.”

To learn more about Faces of Lawsuit Abuse and to view a short video of Piazza’s story, visit Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org.

—Source: Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org

[Posted April 16, 2009]

Welcome to the lawsuit-happy society we live in, where every pathetic excuse for humanity comes with his/her own ambulance-chasing lawyer.

 

[jillian]

lol... again... who decides when a case is "frivolous" if it doesn' go to a judge?

and do you realize that this "information" is being disseminated to you by the "Institute for Legal Reform"? the ILR has as its president former lobbyist for Dow Chemical company? Didn't think so... but they call themselves the institute for legal reform, so they MUST be on your side...

About the President

yeah,,, was real frivolous suing Dow b/c of poisoning our water wih dioxin....

you really need to know where your purported "ionformation" comes from.

 

[jerryjefferson]

Hi this is Jeffer.
Actually i am newly join this is fourm and this site also. Now i am say to all of this member to Hello.

Thankyou

 

[Katzndogz]

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, What’s the Most Frivolous Lawsuit of All?

A California restaurant has been sued because one of its bathroom mirrors was two inches too high.

After the original mirror was vandalized, restaurant owner Ron Piazza replaced it with a new mirror that was set two inches higher than the old one, allegedly in non-compliance with California’s disabilities laws. Before Piazza became aware of and corrected the mistake, three plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit claim to have visited the restaurant a total of 27 times over a three-month period and allege that they suffered damages on each visit.

“It would have been very easy for them to let us know that the mirror was a couple of inches too high, and we could have taken care of that right away,” Piazza said. “Had I not lowered the mirror, they probably would have continued to come and log more visits … It’s very clear to me that they were instructed by someone who really knew the law on how many times to visit, what to look for.”

Thanks to a new national campaign sponsored by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform called “Faces of Lawsuit Abuse,” Piazza’s story is being told to highlight abusive lawsuits and the impact on small businesses, many of which are family -- or locally --owned.

“Abuse lawsuits are not victimless,” said ILR President Lisa Rickard. “Many people think big-dollar lawsuits are only filed against ‘deep pocket’ corporations. Yet, in this current economic climate, many locally-owned businesses like Ron Piazza’s are just one lawsuit away from closing their doors.”

To learn more about Faces of Lawsuit Abuse and to view a short video of Piazza’s story, visit Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org.

—Source: Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org

[Posted April 16, 2009]

The man that filed that lawsuit over the two inches filed hundreds of lawsuits. He has since been permanently enjoined from filing any lawsuits without the prior approval of a judge.

A similar case involved the Trevor Law Group in California that filed thousands of lawsuits over trivia. The Trevor attorneys have all been disbarred and most of them were sent to prison.

Yes, tort reform is necessary.

 

[George Costanza]

there are already meachanisms in place for abuse of the system. cases that are meritless can be dismissed and the parties brining them sanctioned.

how would you suggest you weed out frivolous cases in ADVANCE of their filing? you know, BEFORE a judge hears it?

Same way many of our conservative friends would propose stopping crime - arrest the bad guys BEFORE they commit the crime. Who are the bad guys? You know who they are . . .

 

[Ernie S.]

there are already meachanisms in place for abuse of the system. cases that are meritless can be dismissed and the parties brining them sanctioned.

how would you suggest you weed out frivolous cases in ADVANCE of their filing? you know, BEFORE a judge hears it?

Looser pays would go a long way.

 

[George Costanza]

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, What’s the Most Frivolous Lawsuit of All?

A California restaurant has been sued because one of its bathroom mirrors was two inches too high.

After the original mirror was vandalized, restaurant owner Ron Piazza replaced it with a new mirror that was set two inches higher than the old one, allegedly in non-compliance with California’s disabilities laws. Before Piazza became aware of and corrected the mistake, three plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit claim to have visited the restaurant a total of 27 times over a three-month period and allege that they suffered damages on each visit.

“It would have been very easy for them to let us know that the mirror was a couple of inches too high, and we could have taken care of that right away,” Piazza said. “Had I not lowered the mirror, they probably would have continued to come and log more visits … It’s very clear to me that they were instructed by someone who really knew the law on how many times to visit, what to look for.”

Thanks to a new national campaign sponsored by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform called “Faces of Lawsuit Abuse,” Piazza’s story is being told to highlight abusive lawsuits and the impact on small businesses, many of which are family -- or locally --owned.

“Abuse lawsuits are not victimless,” said ILR President Lisa Rickard. “Many people think big-dollar lawsuits are only filed against ‘deep pocket’ corporations. Yet, in this current economic climate, many locally-owned businesses like Ron Piazza’s are just one lawsuit away from closing their doors.”

To learn more about Faces of Lawsuit Abuse and to view a short video of Piazza’s story, visit Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org.

—Source: Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org

[Posted April 16, 2009]

The man that filed that lawsuit over the two inches filed hundreds of lawsuits. He has since been permanently enjoined from filing any lawsuits without the prior approval of a judge.

A similar case involved the Trevor Law Group in California that filed thousands of lawsuits over trivia. The Trevor attorneys have all been disbarred and most of them were sent to prison.

Yes, tort reform is necessary.

I trust you are aware of the hidden agenda behind "tort reform" legislation. It has very little to do with the removal of "frivolous litigation" and an awful lot more to do with fostering the financial well-being of the fat cats at the expense of individual members of society.

You see, "tort reform" most typically appears in the form of caps on damages that can be awarded for certain types of liability cases, mainly personal injury cases. It makes no distinction between the valid claim and the invalid claim. Hence, a person with a genuine and legitimate claim for personal injury that is worth somewhere in the millions of dollars, will only be allowed damages in the amount of the cap. In California, that cap is $200,000.00, based upon a law that was enacted in the 1970's under the economy that was then in effect. At present economy levels, that cap should be in the neighborhood of two million, but our conservative state government has never seen fit to raise it.

Be very, very wary of "tort reform." It is not designed to help you, as an individual, in any way.

 

[Katzndogz]

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, What’s the Most Frivolous Lawsuit of All?

A California restaurant has been sued because one of its bathroom mirrors was two inches too high.

After the original mirror was vandalized, restaurant owner Ron Piazza replaced it with a new mirror that was set two inches higher than the old one, allegedly in non-compliance with California’s disabilities laws. Before Piazza became aware of and corrected the mistake, three plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit claim to have visited the restaurant a total of 27 times over a three-month period and allege that they suffered damages on each visit.

“It would have been very easy for them to let us know that the mirror was a couple of inches too high, and we could have taken care of that right away,” Piazza said. “Had I not lowered the mirror, they probably would have continued to come and log more visits … It’s very clear to me that they were instructed by someone who really knew the law on how many times to visit, what to look for.”

Thanks to a new national campaign sponsored by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform called “Faces of Lawsuit Abuse,” Piazza’s story is being told to highlight abusive lawsuits and the impact on small businesses, many of which are family -- or locally --owned.

“Abuse lawsuits are not victimless,” said ILR President Lisa Rickard. “Many people think big-dollar lawsuits are only filed against ‘deep pocket’ corporations. Yet, in this current economic climate, many locally-owned businesses like Ron Piazza’s are just one lawsuit away from closing their doors.”

To learn more about Faces of Lawsuit Abuse and to view a short video of Piazza’s story, visit Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org.

—Source: Faces of Lawsuit Abuse.org

[Posted April 16, 2009]

The man that filed that lawsuit over the two inches filed hundreds of lawsuits. He has since been permanently enjoined from filing any lawsuits without the prior approval of a judge.

A similar case involved the Trevor Law Group in California that filed thousands of lawsuits over trivia. The Trevor attorneys have all been disbarred and most of them were sent to prison.

Yes, tort reform is necessary.

I trust you are aware of the hidden agenda behind "tort reform" legislation. It has very little to do with the removal of "frivolous litigation" and an awful lot more to do with fostering the financial well-being of the fat cats at the expense of individual members of society.

You see, "tort reform" most typically appears in the form of caps on damages that can be awarded for certain types of liability cases, mainly personal injury cases. It makes no distinction between the valid claim and the invalid claim. Hence, a person with a genuine and legitimate claim for personal injury that is worth somewhere in the millions of dollars, will only be allowed damages in the amount of the cap. In California, that cap is $200,000.00, based upon a law that was enacted in the 1970's under the economy that was then in effect. At present economy levels, that cap should be in the neighborhood of two million, but our conservative state government has never seen fit to raise it.

Be very, very wary of "tort reform." It is not designed to help you, as an individual, in any way.

Liberals believe in tort lotto!

The cap in California is for $250,000 and limited to pain and suffering in medical malpractice cases. The sky is still very much the limit everywhere else.

The reason why the cap in medical malpractice cases was to stop doctors from leaving the state. As it is, the defensive medicine practiced by doctors to keep down malpractice claims has caused medical care to skyrocket.

 

[George Costanza]

The man that filed that lawsuit over the two inches filed hundreds of lawsuits. He has since been permanently enjoined from filing any lawsuits without the prior approval of a judge.

A similar case involved the Trevor Law Group in California that filed thousands of lawsuits over trivia. The Trevor attorneys have all been disbarred and most of them were sent to prison.

Yes, tort reform is necessary.

I trust you are aware of the hidden agenda behind "tort reform" legislation. It has very little to do with the removal of "frivolous litigation" and an awful lot more to do with fostering the financial well-being of the fat cats at the expense of individual members of society.

You see, "tort reform" most typically appears in the form of caps on damages that can be awarded for certain types of liability cases, mainly personal injury cases. It makes no distinction between the valid claim and the invalid claim. Hence, a person with a genuine and legitimate claim for personal injury that is worth somewhere in the millions of dollars, will only be allowed damages in the amount of the cap. In California, that cap is $200,000.00, based upon a law that was enacted in the 1970's under the economy that was then in effect. At present economy levels, that cap should be in the neighborhood of two million, but our conservative state government has never seen fit to raise it.

Be very, very wary of "tort reform." It is not designed to help you, as an individual, in any way.

Liberals believe in tort lotto!

The cap in California is for $250,000 and limited to pain and suffering in medical malpractice cases. The sky is still very much the limit everywhere else.

The reason why the cap in medical malpractice cases was to stop doctors from leaving the state. As it is, the defensive medicine practiced by doctors to keep down malpractice claims has caused medical care to skyrocket.

You are correct - it is 250K in CA and not 200K. My error. The "sky" SHOULD be the limit in all states. As Jilian so ably pointed out, ample machinery exists for eliminating both frivolous lawsuits as well as excessive liability awards. Legitimate claims should not be limited by arbitrary caps.

Thank you for your opinon as to why caps are imposed on liability damage settlements and/or awards. I can assure you that there are other opinions as to why liability caps come into existence.

 

[jillian]

there are already meachanisms in place for abuse of the system. cases that are meritless can be dismissed and the parties brining them sanctioned.

how would you suggest you weed out frivolous cases in ADVANCE of their filing? you know, BEFORE a judge hears it?

Looser pays would go a long way.

Losing a case doesn't mean it was frivolous. And threatening a working person with bankruptcy if he loses, and forcing him or her to pay the exorbitant legal bills run up by corporate attorneys would only serve to have a chilling effect on people seeking redress for legitimate injuries.

The system already has built in protections. The number of frivolous cases is minuscule in the greater scheme of things.

 

[Katzndogz]

I trust you are aware of the hidden agenda behind "tort reform" legislation. It has very little to do with the removal of "frivolous litigation" and an awful lot more to do with fostering the financial well-being of the fat cats at the expense of individual members of society.

You see, "tort reform" most typically appears in the form of caps on damages that can be awarded for certain types of liability cases, mainly personal injury cases. It makes no distinction between the valid claim and the invalid claim. Hence, a person with a genuine and legitimate claim for personal injury that is worth somewhere in the millions of dollars, will only be allowed damages in the amount of the cap. In California, that cap is $200,000.00, based upon a law that was enacted in the 1970's under the economy that was then in effect. At present economy levels, that cap should be in the neighborhood of two million, but our conservative state government has never seen fit to raise it.

Be very, very wary of "tort reform." It is not designed to help you, as an individual, in any way.

Liberals believe in tort lotto!

The cap in California is for $250,000 and limited to pain and suffering in medical malpractice cases. The sky is still very much the limit everywhere else.

The reason why the cap in medical malpractice cases was to stop doctors from leaving the state. As it is, the defensive medicine practiced by doctors to keep down malpractice claims has caused medical care to skyrocket.

You are correct - it is 250K in CA and not 200K. My error. The "sky" SHOULD be the limit in all states. As Jilian so ably pointed out, ample machinery exists for eliminating both frivolous lawsuits as well as excessive liability awards. Legitimate claims should not be limited by arbitrary caps.

Thank you for your opinon as to why caps are imposed on liability damage settlements and/or awards. I can assure you that there are other opinions as to why liability caps come into existence.

I know there are other opinions, they are BS! Tort lotto is still alive and very well. Multi million dollar settlements are still the norm. Lawyers are just more creative on how they puff up those frivolous claims.

A loser pays system, to be effective, needs to extend beyond the claimant into the plaintiff's attorney. That way, when the attorney KNOWS the case is crap, and an investigator is filming his crippled client on a ski trip, they'll drop the case.

The trend of doctors filing immediate suit themselves against plaintiffs and their attorneys has had a beneficial effect in limiting SOME frivolous claims, but not nearly enough.

 

[Katzndogz]

The number of frivolous claims is about 80%. The claim is inflated either as the wrong done, or the damages. Mostly damages.

 

[Katzndogz]

there are already meachanisms in place for abuse of the system. cases that are meritless can be dismissed and the parties brining them sanctioned.

how would you suggest you weed out frivolous cases in ADVANCE of their filing? you know, BEFORE a judge hears it?

Looser pays would go a long way.

Losing a case doesn't mean it was frivolous. And threatening a working person with bankruptcy if he loses, and forcing him or her to pay the exorbitant legal bills run up by corporate attorneys would only serve to have a chilling effect on people seeking redress for legitimate injuries.

The system already has built in protections. The number of frivolous cases is minuscule in the greater scheme of things.

We all know that doctors are not working people and should be soaked for that hangnail for everything they have.