GOP looks to limit class-action suits

[CShine]

WASHINGTON -- After trying to curb class-action suits for years, Republicans finally have enough support to ram legislation through the Senate to limit what they call an overabundance of frivolous cases against American businesses. But a decision by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to push forward immediately on that legislation instead of finishing work on a defense bill may have the effect of forcing the GOP to wait even longer before claiming a victory that big business has sought for years.

The Senate will vote Tuesday on whether to act immediately on the bill to move more class-action suits from state to federal courts instead of continuing work on the Defense Department's $422 billion authorization bill. That was the pending business when the Senate recessed for its holiday break on May 21.

Several Democrats have promised to join with the GOP to give Republicans the 60 votes they need to move the class-action bill to passage. But those same Democrats are expected to refuse to vote to abandon the defense legislation to do it.

"They believe in class-action reform a lot, but they are not going to vote" to skip over the defense bill, said Assistant Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "We believe we should finish the defense bill and then go to class action."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/05/31/gop_looks_to_limit_class_action_suits/

[w4rma]

1. "several Democrats", eh? grr... (nt)

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. The ultimate payola.

You know this is why Bush and the RNC have been getting millions worth of campaign donations from that Pioneer group. This is the ultimate payola.

[BayCityProgressive]

3. ok..I might get flamed here..

I am currently attending school for a business and a legal assistant's degree. I am all for caps on insurance companies and pharmacutical companies, and I think doctors who are responsible for negligence or malpractice should be fired....so why not put some restrictions on law firms as well? it seems to me that some people take things too far and despite what some people tell you..lawsuits do cost a LOT of money..for all of us..and in terms of small business health. here is one example here in Michigan: A woman is in Mackinaw city and she is doing some interior decorating in a hotel. The hotel is doing some light construction and painting around the staircase she must use. There were signs everywher ewarning her to be careful, along with wet paint signs and workers. She went up and down the stares about 20 times before she tripped on a part of one of the steps. She then proceeded to sue them and win 70,000 dollars. This is absolutely ridiculous. The problem I see is this..how can we regulate run away litigation without hurting average people. But how many businesses will we let runaway lawyers hurt and sue happy nut cases hurt?
I am sure that the Republicans version of "reform" is probably justa big business handout...but I do believe something needs to be done here. Flame Away.

[Bronco69]

4. How about a compromise?

Let's put caps on the premiums insurance companies collect, including little people like me who pay house and car insurance. They certainly have no problem collecting and then cancel your policy when they have to pay.

[BayCityProgressive]

5. exactly what I'm saying Bronco

[Thor_MN]

6. Not intended as a flame, just a comment...

I'm pretty sure that a woman bringing a lawsuit in spite of her own stupidity (Not sure why people should be awarded money for being an idiot...) really doesn't have anything to do with class action lawsuits.
I recently received two awards from a couple class action suits. My take is that the only people who made money off the deal were the law firms. As I recall, the two checks probably cost more to print and mail than the amount that I received...
If they want to reform class action suits, put caps on what the law firms can receive in compensation.

[TahitiNut]

16. As long as those limits are at least equal to what the company ...

... spends on lawyers to defend itself. Sure. :eyes:

[aquart]

9. "Tort reform" is the Steal with Impunity bill.

It is also the Poison Air, Water, Land, and People bill.

It is the Industrial Waste and Destruction To Be Paid Solely By the Taxpayers bill.

It is the Incompetence Reward bill.

Do you have the smallest idea how much harm has to be done before government will act?

And usually it won't lift a finger UNTIL there has been a court case to call attention to the problem.

You want to remove all that to make business easier. Guess what? Your school is teaching you on the bias. Lawsuits don't hinder businesses, they create new industries based on the cheapest most practical way to institute necessary reform. Remove the incentive to reform, and you get old, creaky, polluting factories, poisonous mines, and filthy food. You don't get a better, more modern market. You get a lazy, dirty one that pulls the nation down and inhibits genuine growth.

Now go back and ask your teacher how a lawsuit against tobacco companies is BAD for the nation? Ask how a lawsuit against asbestos companies is BAD for the nation. Any business that declares a profit that debits the nation is a parasite, sucking the nation dry, ultimately killing it. Lawsuits help keep corporations symbiotic, helpful to the nation, instead of destructive to it.

All business is NOT healthy for a nation or its people. Take a good look at WalMart.

[Karenina]

18. Kick!

:kick:

[cap]

10. this is an excuse for big business to break the law with impunity

class actions suits are a huge weapon that keep them in line. big business can move from state to state and then play each state off against each other.

Big business does cost benefit analysis -- they know about how many settlements and what the payout is that they can afford and they set their safety standards accordingly.

so do doctors

anecdotal evidence in support of this: my grandfather had an industrial accident where he injured his eye (remember this is before OSHA). Went to the doctor in Boston. The doctor operated on the wrong eye and left him totally blind. Grand-dad lost his job. No one paid for their mistake -- neither the corporation nor the doctor. Also the corporation did not reform their practices so that this does not happen on a mass scale.

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. Medical mistakes destroy people's lives. Without those jury awards, they

become invisible and their lives & dreams destroyed. It's as if they never mattered.

[AP]

12. Let's see the citation for that case. MI is one of the most anti-

plaintiff states in the country for medical malpractice (the protections they give doctors or incredible) and I'd be very suprised if any company in MI had to pay even 70K bucks to an injured employee unless there were more to the case than what you've set out.

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. I have briefed several court cases, and I'm willing to bet that if you

reread the staircase case which you discuss in your post, that you'll find a fact or two that offers a different perspective than the one you initially present.

[gratuitous]

17. No Way!

Thumbnail sketches of complicated cases by partisan sites are the only way to get to the bottom of difficult legal issues!

[salin]

7. Why don't they do what they want to do and ban all civil suits against

corporations. Isn't that their ultimate goal?

[maggrwaggr]

8. the ONLY THING keeping companies in line is the fear of lawsuits

of course, leave it to the GOP to get rid of that last check and balance.

[Democat]

11. I thought Republicans supported "states's rights"?

The article says this law will move cases from State to Federal courts. Sounds like they are taking away more power from the states.

Haven't heard that "Republicans support state's rights" lie lately, have we?

[gratuitous]

13. Let's see . . .

We have rapacious corporations defrauding, injuring, maiming, disabling, even killing millions of persons every year. Corporations, of course, can't be criminally prosecuted. That is, nobody goes to jail for, say, the millions of smokers killed by Philip Morris or RJR.

Sometimes, the damage done is the equivalent of stealing a dollar or two out of the pockets of each consumer. With a couple of million customers, that can be a significant improvement in someone's personal net worth.

How can we address these wrongs? As before, corporations aren't subject to the death penalty like you and I are. You can't throw a corporation in jail. And what attorney is going to take on a case to win a buck or two for the client? Yet, the public has been wronged and a handful of individuals have been unjustly enriched at the public's expense.

Solution? Limit lawsuits! Without legal recourse, people will just have to swallow what goes against them. For a while.

I, too, would be interested in the citation to the Michigan hotel renovation case. What happened to the woman who tripped? Did she have significant medical bills? Warning signs alone aren't sufficient in many cases, particularly one of extreme personal danger. Also, a $70,000 verdict, as "outrageous" as it sounds, is the proverbial drop in the bucket insurance-coverage wise. Most large public buildings carry insurance for at least a million dollars per incident. Heck, many personal auto insurance policies have limits of $100,000.

[dusty64]

19. More government doing their

corporate bidding and screwing the People. All this with the help of some of the more loathsome "democratic" whores, once this election cycle is over it will be time to focus on cleaning house of these useless puppets.