2
   

The Adverse effects of Tort Laws

 
 
Reply Wed 2 Jul, 2008 12:31 am
The legal system in US has been criticized for being too costly, inefficient and ineffective in administering fair awards. The economic costs associated with these are considerable. These costs are:
1. The individuals suffer directly by having less disposable income than they would otherwise have.
2. Individuals suffer indirectly when the businesses raise their price on goods and services, as a result of paying higher premiums on product liability.
3. When businesses charge higher prices, they do less business as it slows down the job expansion and economic growth. Individuals bear the brunt of this economic slowdown in the form of lower wages and fewer jobs
4. Increasing awareness of litigations, discourage the businesses and individuals from taking any kind of risks which means fewer new products and new technologies are brought to the market.
Individuals living in the urban areas are the ones who are greatly affected by these tort laws as they experienced an even greater increase in tort costs. In the current environment of fiscal responsibility and taxpayer flight from cities, urban governments and residents can ill-afford to allocate large portions of their budgets to litigation costs.
The economic effects of such a huge tort burden on the American economy are hard to be measured directly, but are nonetheless significant. Individuals suffer from the high price of insurance and the increased cost of goods and services. Businesses are hurt by the higher prices they must charge to pay their insurance costs. The overall economy also suffers when productivity and growth are slowed by excessive litigation, which discourages risk-taking and slows the introduction of new products and technologies.
In such circumstances, Tax reforms become very important for the growth of the economy. Texans for Lawsuit Reforms is one such organization, started by Mr. Edit [Moderator]: Link removed to fight tort laws and its adverse effects on the economy. It's a statewide organization aimed at bringing fairness and balance back to the Texan Judicial System.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 896 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jul, 2008 03:46 am
so whats the down side?
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jul, 2008 04:39 am
If I understand correctly that the poster wants to limit the ability to sue for damages, then the down side would be limiting a citizen's ability to have legitimate grievances addressed.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jul, 2008 10:01 am
Usually its the hefty "punitive damages" that spike up the costs. Punies can be excessive, but they are awarded by folks who, after hearing the facts of the case, wish to send a message to the defense.

I believe that by making damages available to the plaintiffs, should they win, this would lower the number of frivolous cases. The case of the lady who was awarded a huge amount in punies for the McD's "boiling coffee" suit, was only seeking reasonabl medical costs and a small compensatory amount. The Jury, after hearing the facts and listened to the disregard that McD's apparently showed to customers in this case(They had it calculated on their "mort" tables). It was the jury that made the reccomendation for the huge award. (Which was overturned in later appeal).
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jul, 2008 09:31 pm
farmerman wrote:
Usually its the hefty "punitive damages" that spike up the costs. Punies can be excessive, but they are awarded by folks who, after hearing the facts of the case, wish to send a message to the defense.

I believe that by making damages available to the plaintiffs, should they win, this would lower the number of frivolous cases. The case of the lady who was awarded a huge amount in punies for the McD's "boiling coffee" suit, was only seeking reasonabl medical costs and a small compensatory amount. The Jury, after hearing the facts and listened to the disregard that McD's apparently showed to customers in this case(They had it calculated on their "mort" tables). It was the jury that made the reccomendation for the huge award. (Which was overturned in later appeal).

It would certainly limit both frivolous and legitimate cases. No individual who wasn't very wealth would dare to sue a large company with high priced lawyers, if they could turn around and extract damages merely for bringing the suit.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jul, 2008 10:08 pm
I'm wondering how the OP managed to drag tax reform into the final paragraph.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Adverse effects of Tort Laws
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 06:08:26