Tort Reform Scam?
Re: Tort Reform Scam?
by The Dharma Bum » Wed Jul 31, 2013 8:57 am
If you aren't supposed to drink it in the car why are they selling through a drive through window?
-
The Dharma Bum - Vice President
- Posts: 11594
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:31 am
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 3285 times
- Been thanked: 617 times
- Political Leaning: Anarcho Communist
Re: Tort Reform Scam?
by The Dharma Bum » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:07 am
Exactly NAB, just look at the amount of damage it caused her. It damn near killed her.
Obviously that is an issue that McDonalds needed to rectify immediately, the lawsuit facilitated that.
Obviously that is an issue that McDonalds needed to rectify immediately, the lawsuit facilitated that.
-
The Dharma Bum - Vice President
- Posts: 11594
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:31 am
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 3285 times
- Been thanked: 617 times
- Political Leaning: Anarcho Communist
Re: Tort Reform Scam?
by eynon81 » Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:08 am
sitting here in criminal practice and humping an employment attorney I'm seeing 2 big issues popping up in the civil world:
1. the prohibitive costs of fighting a claim
&
2. forcing people to sign away their rights to a claim (arbitration clauses)
both favor the big-dogs and both are robbing middle-class folks of their legal rights.
a simple solution would be to create a new class in the judiciary, magistrate gate-keepers. allow these magistrates to view claims under a fairly lax standard of proof. allow people to argue their cases in front of these magistrates without counsel (ie cheap). if the claim is truly frivolous that magistrate would be empowered to dismiss the case. the right to appeal would be liberally preserved however.
1. the prohibitive costs of fighting a claim
&
2. forcing people to sign away their rights to a claim (arbitration clauses)
both favor the big-dogs and both are robbing middle-class folks of their legal rights.
a simple solution would be to create a new class in the judiciary, magistrate gate-keepers. allow these magistrates to view claims under a fairly lax standard of proof. allow people to argue their cases in front of these magistrates without counsel (ie cheap). if the claim is truly frivolous that magistrate would be empowered to dismiss the case. the right to appeal would be liberally preserved however.
Last edited by eynon81 on Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
eynon81 - VIP
- Posts: 19475
- Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
- Location: Golden, Colorado
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 3875 times
- Been thanked: 1821 times
- Political Leaning: Very Conservative
-
The Dharma Bum - Vice President
- Posts: 11594
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:31 am
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 3285 times
- Been thanked: 617 times
- Political Leaning: Anarcho Communist
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 361 guests