Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (31860)	7/14/1999 2:38:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71178

I am not taking it personally, Lather. I don't have anything at stake in this case. I've never even had a product liability case, although I worked on them when I was a law clerk. I am genuinely puzzled by the assumptions you are making. I started law school 17 years ago, so it's hard for me to put myself in your shoes. Yes, the multi-billion dollar lawsuit was initiated on behalf of the injured people. They are the plaintiffs. In a personal injury lawsuit, the case is captioned something like Smith versus Jones. These people are the Smiths. GM is Jones. Nobody else is a party to the case. The only people whose knowledge is relevant is the knowledge of the parties. If Ralph Nader knew, so what? He wasn't a passenger in the car. The lawyer and the experts hired in the case are just hired guns. It's not their lawsuit. But I am sure that the attorneys advised the plaintiffs to sue GM because the driver of the other car didn't have enough insurance. I am surprised by the result in the case. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it were reversed on appeal. I realize that you don't agree with the result. A lot of people don't. I don't have an opinion because I don't know all the facts.