Insane Legal System - was SR22 Crash

Admittedly I don't know much about the US legal system. But to my
knowledge, sentences are still made by judges and juries, not by
attorneys. So blame the judges, juries and maybe the legal system, but
not the attorneay who just try to make the "best" of it.

On Mar 3, 6:28 am, "Denny" wrote:
I see where the widow of Cory Lidel has filed a suit against Cirrus
claiming defective design...
Maybe she can sue his parents for having had a stupid child...
\We absolutely need a 'loser pays' law in this country...

denny

If cirrus doesn't fight this one to the bitter end, they are part of
the problem, not part of the solution...

Someone needs to explain to Cory Lidel's widow that suing Cirrus will
not bring her husband back from the dead, and that he died because of
his own poor decision making. If she want to sue someone, she should
sue the estate of the flight instructor who failed to properly coach
his student.

Most civil lawsuits are settled between the parties without going to trial.
This method is often used by the suing parties lawyers as a method of
frightening the defendant into paying the suing party huge sums of money to
avoid an actual trial. It's a tactic. Often the costs of defending such a
lawsuit, if you take it all the way through a trial, will exceed the
requested pre-trial amount the suing party asks for settling.

A "looser pays" law would give all parties rushing to sue anybody and
everybody pause to consider the consequences should the defendant insist on
a trial and prevail. The suing party would then have to pay the defendants
legal and other expenses incurred defending himself from the lawsuit. I'd
vote for a looser pays 3x winners expenses.

Jim

wrote in message
oups.com...

If cirrus doesn't fight this one to the bitter end, they are part of
the problem, not part of the solution...

Someone needs to explain to Cory Lidel's widow that suing Cirrus will
not bring her husband back from the dead, and that he died because of
his own poor decision making. If she want to sue someone, she should
sue the estate of the flight instructor who failed to properly coach
his student.


In torts the responsible party is the deepest pocket.

A "looser pays" law would give all parties rushing to sue anybody and
everybody pause to consider the consequences should the defendant insist on
a trial and prevail. The suing party would then have to pay the defendants
legal and other expenses incurred defending himself from the lawsuit. I'd
vote for a looser pays 3x winners expenses.

First, it's "loser". If you're any looser with your spelling, people
will brand you a loser.

Second, while a loser pays system sounds attractive for the reasons you
cite, it also has a chilling effect on legitimate suits by
small-resource folks against larger companies, who are more likely to
win at trial simply through outspending on lawyers. That's also a
common tactic - drown the assaulting party in their own legal fees until
they run out of time and money, even before the trial starts. "Loser
pays" doesn't address this, and in fact exacerbates the problem.

This empowers larger companies to take advantage of small fry.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Agreed. My spelling sucks.
Jim

"Jim B" wrote in message
...

Most civil lawsuits are settled between the parties without going to
trial.
This method is often used by the suing parties lawyers as a method of
frightening the defendant into paying the suing party huge sums of money
to
avoid an actual trial. It's a tactic. Often the costs of defending such
a
lawsuit, if you take it all the way through a trial, will exceed the
requested pre-trial amount the suing party asks for settling.

A "looser pays" law would give all parties rushing to sue anybody and
everybody pause to consider the consequences should the defendant insist
on
a trial and prevail. The suing party would then have to pay the
defendants
legal and other expenses incurred defending himself from the lawsuit. I'd
vote for a looser pays 3x winners expenses.


An excellent idea. It will never happen.

wrote:
On Mar 3, 6:28 am, "Denny" wrote:
I see where the widow of Cory Lidel has filed a suit against Cirrus
claiming defective design...
Maybe she can sue his parents for having had a stupid child...
\We absolutely need a 'loser pays' law in this country...

denny

If cirrus doesn't fight this one to the bitter end, they are part of
the problem, not part of the solution...

Someone needs to explain to Cory Lidel's widow that suing Cirrus will
not bring her husband back from the dead, and that he died because of
his own poor decision making. If she want to sue someone, she should
sue the estate of the flight instructor who failed to properly coach
his student.



Not just Cirrus. All the GAMA members, AOPA, EAA, Boeing, Airbus, and
those groups insurance companies need to band together and very publicly
fight this suit.

On 3 Mar 2007 06:49:19 -0800, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in om:

I DO despise the attorneys who encourage this type of action, knowing
full well that it's bogus, frivolous, and harmful to our society.
They are the worst sort of scum.


Attorneys are hired to represent their client's views. They are
officers of the court who assist their clients in navigating the legal
labyrinth; that is as it should be.

It is the juries upon whom scorn should be heaped. We, the people,
are not competent to make such rational judgments, after all look at
who we put in the highest office of the land.

Stefan wrote:

Admittedly I don't know much about the US legal system. But to my
knowledge, sentences are still made by judges and juries, not by
attorneys. So blame the judges, juries and maybe the legal system, but
not the attorneay who just try to make the "best" of it.

True, but attorneys file the suits and it is the threat of a great
number of suits or a class action suit that causes the settlements. It
is the settlements before at trial occurs that causes the problems as
much as it is the large occasional settlements. Dow-Corning settled in
the implant suits when it wasn't even at fault. That is simply wrong
and is a result of lawyers filing lots of suits that cost a fortune to
defend against. So the lawyers take a lion's share of the blame, but I
agree that judges and juries have their fair share as well along with
the plaintiffs.

Matt