Are there too many lawsuits in America? - Delta Sky Discussion Forums

Author	Topic: Are there too many lawsuits in America?
Sky-Moderator	posted 08-30-2004 09:12 AM What do you think? Are there too many lawsuits in America? Is the fear of litigation holding the country back? Or are Philip K. Howard and Common Good off base? Is the existing system necessary to protect individual rights? Tell us what you think.
dnhefner	posted 09-05-2004 05:25 PM Absolutely, there are too many lawsuits in America. The threat of lawsuits have disadvantageously effected legitimate business (persons who are intent on committing illegal acts are rarely deterred by the threat of a lawsuit.) And the "deep pockets" lawsuits against companies that have done nothing wrong are a hidden tax on businesses that winds up costing consumers dearly.
Peter Barry	posted 09-07-2004 02:44 PM Mr. Howard is right on target. I have seen the sorriest representatives of the legal profession seek to create animosity and fear deliberately designed to pick the deep pockets and the not-so-deep pockets of individuals, businesses, and government. Thank God that there are some (far less wealthy) ethical lawyers who defend common decency and a balanced American legal system. The advertising message of the most notorious trial lawyers speaks volumes as to lack of integrity displayed
J Kim Wright	posted 09-10-2004 12:14 AM Corporations, Heal Thyselves The litigation culture is a symptom of a society that has polarized into an adversarial, fear-based culture where there are enemies everywhere. Corporations see "us" not as consumers to whom they have a responsibility but as adversaries out to get them. "We" see them as deep pockets that don't care. The human connection is destroyed by demonization. I am a lawyer and I work to resolve conflict, often in very adversarial divorces. My biggest challenge is to get each party to focus on their own "backyard", to take responsibility for their own actions and attitudes that led to the conflict. When that happens, the blame stops and each is able to see how they are contributing to the problem. When owning their share of the responsibility, each can take actions to resolve it. Each can also have compassion for the other. Humanity is introduced into the equation. Often the dispute seems to magically resolve when that shift occurs. Even if the matter doesn't resolve, the emotional "charge" dissipates and the issues are more easily identified and can be more efficiently litigated. Attorneys who work for big corporations (like Mr. Howard) want to blame the people who sue. A more productive approach might be to change the corporations' responses to the lawsuits. Many corporations are learning that the way to reduce their liability is the counter-intuitive one: taking responsibility and apologizing then looking for ways to prevent future harm actually costs a lot less than fighting in court. In such cases, pay-outs are lower and legal fees are greatly reduced. The corporate representatives feel better about what they're doing, like they're making a difference rather than shirking responsibility. (After all, corporations are made up of human beings too.) The injured person feels he's been heard and is less interested in the attack. Each side experiences a real human being on the other, not an enemy to be destroyed. The article below tells of one such company. I am excited about its message. I've read research that applies the same ideas to many industries. For example, doctors who apologize for their mistakes are sued in a very low percentage of cases. Ironically, why don't they apologize more often? They're afraid of being sued. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Article deleted due to copyright issues.
Al Smith	posted 09-13-2004 05:32 PM Mr. Howard is way off base if his concern is truly the people of this country, he is right on if his concern is really for the wellfare of corporations. It is the fear mongering of corporate mouthpieces like Mr. Howard that have truly created this fear of litigation mentality. The reality is that civil tort litigation has actually gone down in the last decade. Most of the stories of lawsuit abuses are just that, stories that are either not factual or only part of the story - e.g. big verdict by an outraged jury, that is then reduced by the judge, big verdict is reported, reduction is not. Perhaps the best example of the myth is Howard's repeating that the employer will get sued if they give a poor employee a bad reference, thus a bad employee (nurse) is able to kill 13 patients. My home state of Montana considered legislation like Howard wants to give employers immunity for job references to combat this "problem" - research showed that in the past 25 years not a single employer had been sued for giving a bad job reference. The reason - truth is always a defense in job reference cases, employers tell the truth, they won't be held liable. No problem in the real world, but this legislation to fix a myth would have allowed an employer to lie about an employee's job performance with impunity, so the slob boss can get back at those women who quit working for him because of his sexual advances by lying to prospective employers. The reality is that an employer is much more likely to be sued if she fails to provide truthful information about a past employee - the school district that fires a janitor for putting a peep hole in the girls' shower but then decides not to tell prospective employers the truth about why he was let go, WILL GET SUED when that janitor molests a child at the next school he works at. Under Howard's plan the school district get's off the hook for failing to tell the truth about a guilty person, or by telling a lie - falsely accusing an innocent person.
gtreat	posted 09-16-2004 04:28 PM There are far too many lawsuits in America and the fear of litigation is holding the country back. We are certainly out of step with the rest of the world. We operate a small business and have seen firsthand how easily an attorney will bring suit just so he can make money. We have never lost in litigation and I'm not saying this out of anger. It's just that it's a drain on the small businesses that drive this Country. The dollar cost to the population is large, but even larger are the hidden costs of time, emotion and energy they suck from the people involved.
marbelva	posted 09-22-2004 04:09 PM Mr. Howard is right on target with this article. I am a business owner in a highly litigious geographical area of the country. It seems anything will set someone off to make the threat of "I'm going to sue you" and mean it. My business has had numerous suits which common sense warranted not even deserving of my effort and valuable time. However I am compelled to deal with them because someone contacts a lawyer who sees a pot of gold from the insurance policies we carry to protect us from such suits. I do act in fear of litigation, and at times feel frustrated that certain things seem so obviously innocent however an attorney seeking financial gain will distort intent and twist things to make one appear as a beast to pursue their agenda. I applaud Mr. Howard for the sacrifices he makes to drive his view forward.
T Donnelly	posted 09-24-2004 12:05 AM Lawsuits presume guilt until innocence is proven. Isn't our tort system antithetical to the precepts of our justice system? Defendants must pay for protection and never ÒwinÓ when named in a lawsuit. Plaintiffs with the help of their encouraging attorneys may file lawsuits at no cost. Those named must pay to defend themselves and they cannot recoup expenses. As a physician, I have been named in several frivolous lawsuits as part of a "shotgun" strategy where any physician who has had any contact with a patient is named (and sometimes when a physician has never cared for the patient). Any patient or relative may file a lawsuit as long as they can identify a willing lawyer. All of the cases have been dismissed without going to trial, but the expense has been tremendous. The hospitals and any corporations are also named as well as "John Doe physician" and "John Doe corporation." All named parties are forced to hire defense lawyers and then a dizzying amount of paper work transpires. I have been compelled to give depositions and I have been shocked by the behavior of the plaintiffs' attorneys. They have scheduled depositions and then been late or did not show up. Often the attorneys will not have reviewed my role in the case and seem to be reading over my credentials for the first time. Most of these attorneys have very little understanding of the patient's problems or treatments. They are ofen confused about the doctors' roles in the patient 's care. They use the depositions as a way of exploring the basic information of the case instead of carefully reviewing a case and seeking expert advice before filing the lawsuit. A physician may be dismissed early on from the suit and costs are usually limited to $5000.00. If a deposition is required, the costs are usually $10,000.00 to $15,000.00. If a trial ensues, the costs are $25,000.00 to $100,000.00 or more. Parties are often pressured to settle because of the high litigation costs and potential for massive jury awards. Our group's medical malpractice insurance has doubled in the last three years even though we have no settlements against us. We have also had to stop providing certain essential services for patients because the insurers see them as too risky and will not provide coverage. If we are going to continue to allow a large number of lawsuits to be filed then we must improve protections for defendants. Trial lawyers should compensate defendants for their time and pay for defense costs if their suit is found to be without merit. If we have faith in our jury system, then true malpractice will be compensated. I believe that other remedies would be beneficial such as a review panel of physicians, lawyers and patient advocates to prescreen cases. Also, certification of expert witnesses and an independent review of any expert opinion given in court should be compulsory. We now have too many unnecessary tests, rising health care costs, patients losing access to care and an erosion of the doctor-patient relationship. It is time to control the frivolous behavior of plaintiff's attorneys and protect the rights of defendants.
hrlowery	posted 09-24-2004 11:37 PM Do we need lawsuit reform? Absolutely! Does the current system protect the average person? Of course not! The average man is as threatened by this as anyone. The main people who benefit are the trial lawyers who collect the gigantic fees and a few individuals who have learned to milk the system as it currently exists. The rest of us (the average people, big business and everyone in between) are paying the bill.
gholling	posted 09-28-2004 01:36 PM Can someone tell me how to contact "Common Good" In addition to the fear factor, there is the expense issue--it is cheaper to "settle" than go through the legal system. I too can recite anecdotal evidence of the fear--in fact, I witnessed 3 of 7 members of a condominium board abstain from voting on an improvement because if someone got hurt in the future, their votes might be a source of liability--ridiculous!!
Sky-Moderator	posted 09-29-2004 09:46 AM The "Common Good" website is: http://cgood.org
rlk	posted 09-29-2004 09:24 PM Lawsuits are out of control, and the only one who wins is the attorney. How about putting a cap on what they can get per lawsuit instead of the traditional persent. I bet if the rewards weren't so hugh for the attorneys we'd see fewer lawsuits. Doctors are capped by the insurance companies and there is talk of capping the amount of reward to a patient who sues, but never any talk of capping the attorneys. Maybe that's because they make the laws!!
dcpcrun	posted 10-01-2004 03:00 AM When we were kids and we were angry about something most people responded with something like, "I hate them. That is not fair. I'm going to get tehm." The fact that my 10 year old son just went through a stage in which his response to anything that he didn't like was, "THey can't do that. I'm going to sue them," concerns me. He doesn't live in a household that supports that mentality at all so he obviously is immersed in a society that does.
vguest	posted 10-13-2004 11:00 AM Yes, there are entirely to many lawsuits in this country w/ so many of them being unnecessary and frivolous...IT MUST BE STOPPED!!!
flightdoc	posted 10-17-2004 12:05 PM Mr. Howard is correct the major problem is the lack of "reasonablenes" to our current system. When a drug company issues a voluntary recall of a drug found to have a problem and the same day ads appear asking patients to call a number for a class action suit, where is the companies incentive to identify problems with their drug? Doctors order huge numbers of unneccessary tests and x-rays to "protect" against losing a lawsuit These tests not only cost $ but result in dangerous radiation to patients. The CT scan for the child with a bump on the head and almost no risk of a significant injury (note the risk is never 0)may cause future learning problems, cancer risk, etc., but those risks will occur long after and the risk of suit is now should he/she be the 1 in 100,000 or 1,000,000 who has a complication (whether or not the CT would have found it).
Mark Podmore	posted 10-29-2004 04:59 PM There are way too many frivolous lawsuits. I am in the medical field. Physicians cannot routinely diagnose a patient's condition without first ordering all those "unnecessary tests" (per insurance companies) because of the fear of being sued for malpractice. And people wonder why healthcare costs have soared!! (I am a weekly Delta business traveler -- thanks for the excellent Delta service)
sciteach	posted 12-04-2004 02:53 PM The culture of "sue" has definitely trickled down to the children. I teach science to teenagers. A full 10 out of my hundred students have expressed the desire to be a lawyer. They do not speak of righting great wrongs or of fighting the great fight. They speak of money and lawsuits.
Chiefsix	posted 02-24-2005 02:11 AM I must be a desenting voice here. It seems that everyone here is in favor of protection of Corporate America and forgetting the rights of the individuals affected by corporate negligence and malice. Id be willing to bet almost everyone posting in favor of "stopping lawsuits" has never had a family member killed or maimed by an incomptent DR or a child who has died from a drug put out by a drug company who was so eager to see profits from marketing that it wasnt properly tested, ect ect. I agree some lawsuits are frivilous, but many are well justified. It is the tort system that keeps the rights of individuals intact. The only thing corporate giants fear is large settlements. They could care less about the individual, this has been proven time and time again in a society motivated by the dollar. If any reform is needed, its reforming the amount ATTORNEYS can receive and being sure more compensation gets to the aggreived party. Im convinced everyone would be singing a different tune if it were thier child who died due to a DR's incompetence or neglect. Trail lawyers are your last defense against corporate misconduct. If your not doing something to be sued for you have nothing to worry about right? The last time I was in a court the Judge awarded court and Attorney fees to the prevailing party. So if your on the up and up, you have nothing to fear from trial lawyers. Giving free rain to corporate America and removing consquences for misconduct, malice and just plain ol negligence is the worst idea Ive heard in a long time.
Keithrodney	posted 04-22-2005 06:50 PM Does anyone have a reference cite with data of the number of lawsuits in America verses other western countries

All times are ET (US)
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic

Contact Us | Back to Feedback