"David Megginson" wrote in message
able.rogers.com...
CFLav8r wrote:

We need less laws, but if we had just one more it should the "Common
Sense
Act".
The common sense act would be for those that sue when common sense
should
have dictated your actions/results.
Slipping and falling on a wet floor in a supermarket is not the fault of
the
supermarket,
it is the fault of the individual for not paying attention to where they
were walking.

Actually, you can fix the litigation problem in the U.S. (and to a lesser
extent, in other countries) with a couple of very minor changes:

1. The loser normally pays the winner's legal costs (we already do this in
Canada); and

2. punitive damages go to the taxpayers, not to the plaintiff.

Collectivist premise; they aren't the ones damaged. That's part of the
reasoning that got us in this mess in the first place.


The second change could be huge. For example, if BigCorp does something
that injures a person, the jury might decide to award the person 1.5M for
pain and suffering, but then add on 50M punitive damages to teach BigCorp
a
lesson. There is no reason that the plaintiff should get that 50M, since
it
is effectively a fine -- if it goes to the taxpayers (like any other fine
would), then there is less to tempt people to spurious lawsuits.

Your solution mixes civil and criminal law...a really bad situation.