Class action legislation passes

[MattTheSkywalker]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20050217/ap_on_go_co/limiting_lawsuits

Many class actions will now be remanded to Federal Court.

Wonderful news!

 

[JustJacked]

there goes captain Bush again. helping out the rich while fucking over the poor! such a nice guy! where the fuck is Robin Hood?

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

there goes captain Bush again. helping out the rich while fucking over the poor! such a nice guy! where the fuck is Robin Hood?

Robin Hood was a crook sir.

Theft is theft.

Aren't you a high income taxpayer? You said you were on the finance forum???

 

[JustJacked]

Robin Hood was a crook sir.

Theft is theft.

Aren't you a high income taxpayer? You said you were on the financed forum???

yes, but I still dislike Bush. everything the guy does is for the rich. I wasnt born into money so I know what its like to be on both sides. Im sure every poor person would rather be in my shoes and pay a little more taxes than be poor.

 

[jerseyart]

Your firm works with insurance litiagtion is that right Matt?

What impact do you foresee excepting the obvious one of cherry picked or otherwise more amenable state courts?

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Your firm works with insurance litiagtion is that right Matt?

What impact do you foresee excepting the obvious one of cherry picked or otherwise more amenable state courts?

Insurance litigation is a big part of what we do.

Impact - this will change the way insurance companies reserve against losses and will free up more money for investment, at least for a while. In the long term, nothing changes. Here's why:

State court judges will turn activist and seek to certify things as class actions in their states against federal guidelines. This won't unclog the courts - you'll now have state judges (often elected) trying to keep things in their courts, rather than turn them over to appointed federal judges.

Courts won't unclog - lawyers and law firms will give more money to elected state judges to exercise "discretion" about what goes where. So, no substantive difference IMO.

 

[jerseyart]

I hear differnet things (mostly on whether or not your talking to a litigation attornye or not) but what was the impact of that tort reform passed during the Clinton administration?

Has it actually had any impact on shareholder suits?

 

[JustJacked]

Insurance litigation is a big part of what we do.

Now I see how this benefits you. But don't you think that the little guy is gonna suffer because of this?

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

I hear differnet things (mostly on whether or not your talking to a litigation attornye or not) but what was the impact of that tort reform passed during the Clinton administration?

Has it actually had any impact on shareholder suits?

That's not really an area we operate in; as an observer I can tell you that it has led to a surge in companies obtaining D&O (directors and officers) liability coverage, as well as E&O (errors and omissions) coverage.

Companies seem to be insuring against the risk rather than taking steps to mitigate it.

 

[jerseyart]

Insurance litigation is a big part of what we do.

Now I see how this benefits you. But don't you think that the little guy is gonna suffer because of this?

Bor, I'm sure you're a good guy, but you'd learn a lot more if you kept quiet and paid attention than rambling on endlessly with meaningless hyperbole.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Insurance litigation is a big part of what we do.

Now I see how this benefits you. But don't you think that the little guy is gonna suffer because of this?

Actually we don't touch class actions nor do we do insurance defense. This doe snot affect us very much except to give our clients (the insurance industry) more cash.

I posted about the potential outcomes in response to JerseyArt above.

 

[The Wenis]

this is actually a good bill.
the only peeps who get rich from class actions are ambulance chasers. on the downside greedy corporate execs will now have one less thing to worry about.

 

[jerseyart]

Thanks Matt

I was interested a few years back after a suit wasthreatened against our company, but was quickly distracted by shiny objects or large breasts. I can't recall which now. Maybe she was wearing shiny pasties.

But I recall at the time that the actual number of suits and monetary awards had continued to increase, but some litigation attornies were making arguments that the numbers were skewed soemwhat by an actual increase in corporate fraud (pre Enron) which seemed to make some sense after the market dive at the end of the Clinto term

 

[JustJacked]

this is actually a good bill.
the only peeps who get rich from class actions are ambulance chasers. on the downside greedy corporate execs will now have one less thing to worry about.

I agree with this, but there still are some people who get fucked by big corperations. If people conducted business in an honest manner than this would't happen.

But then I guess people just do it to themselves with their 'ambulance chasing'.

 

[jerseyart]

I agree with this, but there still are some people who get fucked by big corperations. If people conducted business in an honest manner than this would't happen.

But then I guess people just do it to themselves with their 'ambulance chasing'.

It's a difficult balance maing, and one unfortunately that is best determined by those with actual legal training.

You want shareholders for example to sue for fraud, but not eat up resources on a hope to get rich quick class action suit every time a share falls a few pennies.

You want people to be able to sue for actual injury from products, but not make it financially suicidal for a company to market such products as birth control ( and this is an actual example) that they sell in every other first world nation because of the liability issues.

Havign suits brought to the federal level discourages some of the cherry picking of courts that often lead to outrageous and unjust settlements.

 

[JustJacked]

It's a difficult balance maing, and one unfortunately that is best determined by those with actual legal training.

You want shareholders for example to sue for fraud, but not eat up resources on a hope to get rich quick class action suit every time a share falls a few pennies.

You want people to be able to sue for actual injury from products, but not make it financially suicidal for a company to market such products as birth control ( and this is an actual example) that they sell in every other first world nation because of the liability issues.

Havign suits brought to the federal level discourages some of the cherry picking of courts that often lead to outrageous and unjust settlements.

I agree, and now people will be getting screwed by greedy execs because they make stupid outrageous claims. Its a lose lose situation. I guess its their own fault. I wouldnt want someone making some ridiculas claim against me and sueing me for millions. Now I see why they are doing this. My initial dislike of Bush made me jump to conclusions.

I'm not too sure how things work down there but up here you have hardly any big lawsuits. Last I heard if you sue someone here and lose you have to pay there legal fees. Does it work like that down there?

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

I agree, and now people will be getting screwed by greedy execs because they make stupid outrageous claims. Its a lose lose situation. I guess its their own fault. I wouldnt want someone making some ridiculas claim against me and sueing me for millions. Now I see why they are doing this. My initial dislike of Bush made me jump to conclusions.

I'm not too sure how things work down there but up here you have hardly any big lawsuits. Last I heard if you sue someone here and lose you have to pay there legal fees. Does it work like that down there?

Nah, the US doesn't have "loser pays". It is a great system, I wish we did, but te trial lawyers lobby very hard to keep things as they are.

 

[JustJacked]

Nah, the US doesn't have "loser pays". It is a great system, I wish we did, but te trial lawyers lobby very hard to keep things as they are.

They should have that. It would probably stop alot of the outrageous claims. You never hear about companies in Canada getting sued for hundreds of millions because only one of the top 5 execs is a women or donuts are only allowed for management! lol

 

[Razorguns]

They should have that. It would probably stop alot of the outrageous claims. You never hear about companies in Canada getting sued for hundreds of millions because only one of the top 5 execs is a women or donuts are only allowed for management! lol

It would set up a system where only the rich could sue, cuz the poor couldn't afford the consequences if they lost.

Not an ideal system for encouraging "justice" in our system.

 

[CFZB]

Will this Help Big Pharma with All the Pending Lawsuits BecAuse OF Vioxx AND Celebrex and the Countless Others Harming People because the Industries Dont Have to Do Significant testing?

Im just Curious.....

 

[JustJacked]

It would set up a system where only the rich could sue, cuz the poor couldn't afford the consequences if they lost.

Not an ideal system for encouraging "justice" in our system.

Either way, someone is gonna lose. If people were honest than they wouldnt have to make stupid laws like this.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Will this Help Big Pharma with All the Pending Lawsuits BecAuse OF Vioxx AND Celebrex and the Countless Others Harming People because the Industries Dont Have to Do Significant testing?

Im just Curious.....

nah, pending suits will proceed as they were.

testing is specified by the government, bro, FDA is the approving body.

 

[Austin316]

ABOUT TIME

seriously these goddam lawsuits are ruining society

 

[Austin316]

Maybe insurance rates for doctors can finally go down, lord knows we need more of them.

Some law suits have merit, but many many many don't. The tobacco one for instance, only an idiot could honestly claim they didn't know smoking was harmful. Or how about suing fast food industries for obesity? Jesus Christ don't even think to defend those and say they were good for society. Weeding out all the pointless bullshit like that is a GOOD thing

 

[biteme]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20050217/ap_on_go_co/limiting_lawsuits

Many class actions will now be remanded to Federal Court.

Wonderful news!

You remind me of Captain Love from the movie, "Zorro."

 

[rsnoble-im-back]

Actually I think this is bullshit because the only recourse the little man has to overcome these corporate monsters is now thrown in the trashcan. If a company knows that it can't be sued.................not a good situation.

All the benefits you mention are a mere coverup for the harsh ass fucking of the non-rich that is about to take place. I assure you.

 

[Austin316]

SO your for fat people making millions off getting fat on fast food?

If there is actually a case presented that has any merit and doesn't consist of IDIOTS tryig to make money off the fact that they are the dumbest fucking people on the earth, Im sure that it will be looked into, and they will be rewarded properly.

 

[rsnoble-im-back]

SO your for fat people making millions off getting fat on fast food?

If there is actually a case presented that has any merit and doesn't consist of IDIOTS tryig to make money off the fact that they are the dumbest fucking people on the earth, Im sure that it will be looked into, and they will be rewarded properly.

No, im not. and this and a few other examples will be beaten to death by the GOP and the larger amount of "worthwhile" suits will be thrown in the trashcan.
Since the federal judges are all, or soon will be, Bush's fuck buddies it's easy to see where this is heading.

 

[manny78]

Easiest way to end all that shit would be a system where the loser has to pay full legal fees and not only some fees established by an outdated evaluation.

 

[biteme]

Easiest way to end all that shit would be a system where the loser has to pay full legal fees and not only some fees established by an outdated evaluation.

Nah. Just because someone loses, doesn't necessarily mean the lawsuit wasn't valid.

 

[manny78]

Nah. Just because someone loses, doesn't necessarily mean the lawsuit wasn't valid.

But you lost. You made someone waste his money over something wich wasn't worth a judgement.

 

[biteme]

But you lost. You made someone waste his money over something wich wasn't worth a judgement.

Well, let me just give an example. Was OJ Simpson worthy of a guilty judgement? He still won because he had lots of money. Should his accusers have to pay? I know this a criminal case, but you can extrapolate.

 

[manny78]

Well, let me just give an example. Was OJ Simpson worthy of a guilty judgement? He still won because he had lots of money. Should his accusers have to pay? I know this a criminal case, but you can extrapolate.

On the civil trial he lost. But let's say he'd won then it would have been normal for plaintiffs to pay actual legal costs.