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.

Politics : The Castle -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (308)	11/11/2002 9:29:57 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 7936

Maybe a limit of punative damages set either as a multiple of actual damages or some decently large dollar figure would be a good start. Perhaps an end to the idea that if you are considered .0001% responsible for a problem but have the biggest pockets that you are on the hook for the whole thing. That would be a start at least. Joint and several liability is a huge part of the problem -- EVERYBODY GETS SUED. And whoever has the deep pockets also has the highest-priced legal team, which means it is worth more to settle it out. I once had a client who hired an employee. She (the employee) screwed up the paperwork on her medical insurance. She gets pregnant, starts having problems, no insurance because she failed to return the paperwork to the insurance company. My guy's lawyer, with a straight face, told me, "Pay her. It's $20,000, and you're done with it; otherwise, you're going to spend $100k easy." I wrote the check (out of the client's bank account, of course), and paid her. THAT'S WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE SYSTEM.