quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by bigwagon:
Sounds like the best way to achieve tort reform in this country is to eliminate contingency fees.

That would be an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I don't like things like this thread is about anymore than the next intelligent individual, but, the problem here isn't the system, it's the juries.

At what point can the judge over-rule the jury and/or, moves to have a re-trail if the verdict is so far out of line to what was presented and the arguments made?

Is it possible or, are judges loathe to do so out of respect for the process and not wanting to set bad precedent?

quote:

Originally posted by drill sgt:
How much was awarded??? Let us not forget that the IRS agents are standing there with their hand out for their cut as well as the state involved doing the exact same thing...

The injury part of a personal injury award is not taxable because it is not income. Only any part that compensates for lost income. And guess what - they generally structure these so that none of it is characterized as a replacement of income.

So, that taxman part just isn't true. There are many opinions based on ignorance in this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by bigwagon:
Sounds like the best way to achieve tort reform in this country is to eliminate contingency fees.

That would be an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I don't like things like this thread is about anymore than the next intelligent individual, but, the problem here isn't the system, it's the juries.

At what point can the judge over-rule the jury and/or, moves to have a re-trail if the verdict is so far out of line to what was presented and the arguments made?

Is it possible or, are judges loathe to do so out of respect for the process and not wanting to set bad precedent?

When the facts proved don't support the judgment. This is called "factual insufficiency." Trial courts sometimes do this, but appeals are often taken up on this basis. Then the case can be settled in the appeals process, or they can ride it out and see what the court of appeals does. There is a preference to not overturn a verdict, but it certainly can happen.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by drill sgt:
How much was awarded??? Let us not forget that the IRS agents are standing there with their hand out for their cut as well as the state involved doing the exact same thing...

The injury part of a personal injury award is not taxable because it is not income. Only any part that compensates for lost income. And guess what - they generally structure these so that none of it is characterized as a replacement of income.

So, that taxman part just isn't true. There are many opinions based on ignorance in this thread.

Sounds right . My Mom was part of a class action suit against a drug manufacturer . She collected almost 90k . Never paid a dime in taxes on it and the IRS never asked for anything .

There’s always a tear jerker to be told for every 10,000 “sue frivolously for $40 million, get $100,000 from the insurance company to go away” type suits. Don’t like the idea of getting rid of contingency suits? Fine then. Everything goes to a trial and loser pays. Oh and no jury research. Juror identification is no longer allowed. No more jury farming.

Don’t like that either? Ok, reduce contingency fees to a max of ten percent. I know, another sad , sad story there too. But…but…but that takes the money out of it. Really, no kidding, I didn’t notice.

I know there’s a sad, sad story to be had without jury farming, but I really don’t care. It’s hard for me to believe the whole sad, sad story business and my personal favorite “it starts with a victim” while all the “CALL AND WE’LL GET YOU FREE MONEY” signs litter the interstate.

The whole star spangled banner playing in the background while we get explained that really the ambulance chasers are doing us a favor gets old. Everybody knows it’s misused. But, the thin pinstriped line closes ranks when any tort reform is mentioned. They always tear on the heart strings cause “jeepers, I bought my second Lambo for truth Justice and the American way”

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

“CALL AND WE’LL GET YOU FREE MONEY” signs litter the interstate.

Yup. There is a reason Congress is filled with lawyers. Literally a couple posts ago someone felt comfortable saying “this thread is filled with idiots” at the mention of reform. Saying that eliminating contingency fees certainly isn’t the answer is true yet it was the first suggestion in a complicated problem. Rarely is the first thrown out thought the correct one. Does that make the one who suggested it an idiot? Hardly.

This is akin to getting Congress to stop giving themselves pay raises or vote in term limits. The people in the position to change the system don’t want to change the system.

Of course reform is necessary. V Tails sign literally is the same as a dozen or more than line I4. This lawsuit had no legs. Our current system paid them. Until the lawyers want to fix this it won’t get fixed. Hate to be the spoiler, that won’t ever happen. (I think nearly 200 members of Congress are lawyers)

quote:

...nearly 200 members of Congress are lawyers

The bottom 25% of the class needs work too.

"...future damages."

In case the McNugget attacks her again?

Unless the employee put the nugget on the kid, its the parents fault and this is what is wrong with the country.

Yup. If I bbq in my backyard and the food comes out hot, which it does, if I hand it to an unsupervised 4 year old whatever happens next is on me.

I would love to hear the lawyers on this board offer up possible solutions to curtail ridiculous lawsuits and settlements which are cheaper than winning. Maybe there is no perfect solution, I suspect this is true, but there has to be some easy low hanging fruit rules/laws that could help. Once again, I honestly doubt there are many lawyers who actually want to "fix" the system. It is too good of a money maker.