Bill: Lawsuit Reform Act
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2140
|This bill will limit frivolous lawsuits that willl bankrupt the private sector because of greedy and corrupt lawyers.|
Old value:: There is no cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Current: There is a cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Proposed: There is a cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
|Date||22:19:58, November 11, 2005 CET||From||Liberty Party||To||Debating the Lawsuit Reform Act|
Note your reference to 'frivolous' lawsuits is irrelevant because if damages are awarded (i.e., the plaintiff wins in court) the lawsuit is, by definition, not frivolous.
If you want to improve justice, we need to tidy up what is/what is not actionable rather than trying to limit the quantum of damages that can be awarded.
|Date||19:06:26, November 12, 2005 CET||From||Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy||To||Debating the Lawsuit Reform Act|
|Message||The courts should decide, not the government.|
|Date||19:24:02, November 12, 2005 CET||From||Imperialists Union||To||Debating the Lawsuit Reform Act|
|Message||What we are trying to discourage is how lawyers take advantage of suits that may or may not be just and use them for their own personal gain, seeking excessive damages that they don't deserve. Placing a limit (the limit is not defined in this bill, it can be high or low) on damages will protect our industries from unjust exploition.|
|Date||20:18:33, November 12, 2005 CET||From||Liberty Party||To||Debating the Lawsuit Reform Act|
|Message||If the damages are not deserved, they won't be awarded. If they are awarded, then that is evidence by itself that the damages are deserved.|
|Date||21:00:39, November 12, 2005 CET||From||Herut Orthodoxy||To||Debating the Lawsuit Reform Act|
|Message||Some ignore the fact that business is always the target of vilification. "Big Oil", "Big Tobacco", and "Big Pharmacutical" are three major examples of this vilification.|
Who will side with Big Tobacco over the poor sap who smoked? The answer is obvious and seen - NO ONE. Which is why Tobacco avoids lawsuits by settling out of court.
This is not to say that Big Business is not at least partially responsible for the currnet state of its own reputation with 'Golden Parachutes', etc, but all those factors influence a case and a judgement, and thus 'deserved' may not be related with the case, but with public perception which may or may not have any actual value in sentencing and fines.
|Date||21:05:27, November 12, 2005 CET||From||Herut Orthodoxy||To||Debating the Lawsuit Reform Act|
|Message||That being said, we do not know if we agree with monetary damages in general being limited, since that could be compensatory and not punitive. Under the current wording, it seems that even compensatory could have a limit set, and as such we are torn on this legislation...|
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Total Seats: 136
Total Seats: 419
Total Seats: 0
|Random fact: Don't put "the" as the first word in your party name, because when parties are referred to in news reports, their names are preceded with "the", e.g. The [Socialist Party] has lost.|
|Random quote: "It is not titles that honor men, but men that honor titles." - Niccolo Machiavelli|