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 : Investment Chat Board Lawsuits -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (4828)	6/25/2003 11:52:45 PM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

Re: Loser Pays Here is the Association of Trial Lawyers or America's official stance on the English "loser pays" system: ===== ENGLISH RULE Supporters of legal "reform" advocate adoption of the English rule, also known as "loser pays," on legal fees and costs. They argue that such a rule would deter frivolous lawsuits. However, such a system actually would further erode personal responsibility in America, because it would force injured citizens to back down from holding wrongdoers accountable. The English rule would force injured Americans to shy away from holding wrongdoers accountable because a claim filed against a powerful corporation or government could wipe out these citizens financially if they have to pay the other side's legal fees and costs. Winning a trial is never guaranteed, and the injured party would be faced with this stark reality: You can try to right a wrong, but if all does not go exactly as planned your family gets a one-way ticket to financial ruin and dependency. Even England does not strictly adhere to the English rule. More than half of England's citizens qualify for government-run legal assistance. The English rule rarely applies when the "loser" is a recipient of legal aid. The conservative English magazine The Economist in January called for abandonment of the English Rule and expansion of contingent fees. The magazine stated: "The worst aspect of this system [English Rule] is that it denies access to justice to huge numbers of people." English trade unions provide legal representation to their members and pay the other side's costs if a case is lost. Without a government-run program to help injured consumers pay legal fees and costs, Americans could not afford to vindicate their rights and wrongdoers would not be held accountable. Has anyone seriously suggested that America needs to replace its system, in which private litigants pay their own expenses, with a government-run program? atla.org =====