Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
HOT COFFEE: Wake up to what's being done to YOUR rights
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="inactive" data-source="post: 1561266" data-attributes="member: 7488"><p>Define "loser." This issue with tort reform isn't that the plaintiff isn't owed damages, in most cases, so the plaintiff is nearly always the victor and the defendant the loser. The issue is with the judgements being sought.</p><p></p><p>Example:</p><p></p><p>If I slip and fall on your property, and show you are negligent (say you had a water leak), I am owed damages. Let's say I have no permanent injuries, but I have a 3,000 dollar medical bill. </p><p></p><p>You or your insurer offers 10,000 to cover the generals and specials. I balk and sure for an absurd 20 million, requesting generals, specials, and punitive. The court awards me your original 10,000 offer. I am still the "winner" of the court case, as it found you negligent and I am awarded damages. You still pay court costs because you are the loser. Is that fair, or should I be forced to pay due to my being litigious? </p><p></p><p>What if the court awards 18 million, or 12,000, some in-between amount (which is most likely)? Who is the winner and loser now?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="inactive, post: 1561266, member: 7488"] Define "loser." This issue with tort reform isn't that the plaintiff isn't owed damages, in most cases, so the plaintiff is nearly always the victor and the defendant the loser. The issue is with the judgements being sought. Example: If I slip and fall on your property, and show you are negligent (say you had a water leak), I am owed damages. Let's say I have no permanent injuries, but I have a 3,000 dollar medical bill. You or your insurer offers 10,000 to cover the generals and specials. I balk and sure for an absurd 20 million, requesting generals, specials, and punitive. The court awards me your original 10,000 offer. I am still the "winner" of the court case, as it found you negligent and I am awarded damages. You still pay court costs because you are the loser. Is that fair, or should I be forced to pay due to my being litigious? What if the court awards 18 million, or 12,000, some in-between amount (which is most likely)? Who is the winner and loser now? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
HOT COFFEE: Wake up to what's being done to YOUR rights
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom