Reply
Fri 5 Nov, 2004 01:24 pm
Edit [Moderator]: Moved from Politics to Legal.
What will the consequences be for lawyers in small towns v/s larger city lawyers if personal injury claims are capped?
Big Firm city lawyers are predominantly defense lawyers, while plaintiff's lawyers are often independent or in smaller firms. Generally, the only plaintiff suits taken by the more prominent firms are class action suits.
However, I doubt that personal injury caps will happen in the way implied by the Bush team. This is mostly a state issue and a diversion--I'd be shocked to see the Federal Government intervene in a major way.
It's a bit different in countries where there have always been caps. Most firms do both plaintiff and defence work here. Large/small city/firm splits don't seem as pronounced as they are in most U.S. jurisdictions. I work both sides of the border, and the lines in the U.S. do seem a bit, well, over-drawn.
I wonder how many law firms keep their family law prices affordable by the large sums made from personal injury settlements?
None, I would imagine. First of all, most lawyers specialize--few would be both family lawyers and personal liability lawyers. Secondly, if one part of your practice is eating revenue from another part, you drop the non-profitable part.
Sorry I meant in smaller towns. The law offices that only have 1 or 2 lawyers.
Ah, well, I'm not sure... I would guess that family law can be made profitable as well. I'm also not really sure how much revenue such lawyers obtain from personal liability law, and how much of that would be reduced by the hypothetical caps.
A lawyer calls a plumber because his toilet is clogged. After about 2 minutes in the bathroom the plumber walks out and hands the lawyer a bill for $350.00. The lawyer says hey I'm a lawyer and I don't even make this kind of money, the plumber says neither did I when I was a lawyer.
Stupid but it comes to mind.
Do you think that a cap is the best solution to pointless lawsuits? I know that something needs to be done, I just don't know what.
I'm with you cannister, in that I don't know exactly what the best thing to do about it is. My first instinct is that caps won't keep the suits out of court but would limit the awards. Whether that limits the lawyer's take or the plaintiff's take is an open question.
It seems like there should be some way to cap the lawyer's fees or to weed out the suits that really are frivolous. I know a judge can, and many do, throw out suits that are completely without merit. How do we dictate what's thrown out without overriding a judge's discretion?
Here comes the lightning...
I don't think that 2 million for hot coffee is fair, but I also don't think that $20,000 is fair for a lost life. What should the balance be?
FreeDuck wrote:It seems like there should be some way to cap the lawyer's fees or to weed out the suits that really are frivolous. I know a judge can, and many do, throw out suits that are completely without merit. How do we dictate what's thrown out without overriding a judge's discretion?
As far as claims in federal courts go, we've already got 12(b)(6) dismissals, and summary judgment. What we need is a stronger Rule 11 to make a more serious threat of sanctions for frivolous suits. As I understand it, the redrafting of Rule 11 is already underway. As far as capping atty costs, that may have some negative effects on the quality of representation. It's a good question, but it's very complicated.
I don't know. Maybe if we had more examples of these types of things we could see what the problems are. It's tough to imagine the government deciding ahead of time how much a life or an injury is worth. We saw how well that went over with the 9/11 families.
Agree with you Steppenwolf (thanks for the sig line, btw) that it's extremely complicated. It's why I'm kind of wary of rash solutions -- like caps. My instinct is to leave it to judges and juries, but I guess that's where the problem lies sometimes.
cannistershot wrote:I don't think that 2 million for hot coffee is fair, but I also don't think that $20,000 is fair for a lost life. What should the balance be?
Well, to be honest, much of that is a jury question. Although we don't always agree with jury verdicts, limiting the discretion of the jury often brings up Seventh Amendment questions. There are many elements to balance here, not just the size of the rewards.
Steppenwolf wrote:FreeDuck wrote:It seems like there should be some way to cap the lawyer's fees or to weed out the suits that really are frivolous. I know a judge can, and many do, throw out suits that are completely without merit. How do we dictate what's thrown out without overriding a judge's discretion?
As far as claims in federal courts go, we've already got 12(b)(6) dismissals, and summary judgment. What we need is a stronger Rule 11 to make a more serious threat of sanctions for frivolous suits. As I understand it, the redrafting of Rule 11 is already underway. As far as capping atty costs, that may have some negative effects on the quality of representation. It's a good question, but it's very complicated.
What will the sanctions entail for frivolous lawsuits? Could a lawyer be disbarred (sp?) I guess this may boil down to having both sides of the political arena represented so that it will hit the middle instead of one side or the other?
Lawyers generally aren't disbarred for frivolous lawsuits. After all, we don't bring 'em without clients. Of course, you can say, the lawyer shouldn't take the case, but unless there is a pretty cut and dried situation of this one did it but we sued the other one 'cause we felt like it and not because we thought we might have a real cause of action, the Bar Association won't get involved. The law changes all the time, and innovative theories are tested and retested. If the penalties for frivolous suits are given out too readily, it stifles that innovation. For example, computer crime is a new cause of action - would you have disbarred the first lawyer who brought suit for it?
No. But what action should be taken to cut down on frivolous lawsuits?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace