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 (4832)	6/26/2003 1:06:42 AM
From: Jeffrey S. Mitchell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

"Loser pays" restitution would only apply to losing plaintiffs as a means to try to prevent frivolous lawsuits. If you lose as a defendant, your fate, as it is now, would be up to the presiding judge or jury. - Jeff

To: David Lawrence who wrote (4832)	6/30/2003 3:01:41 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12465

I think I prefer legislation requiring judges to sanction the lawyers (and prohibit indemnification by the client) for bringing and/or trying a frivolous case before the court... assuming they lose. We already have such rules. However, frivolous is a pretty hard thing to establish. Almost every case has some potential merit, or else no contingent fee lawyer would even waste time drafting the complaint. I have tried several times to get suits tossed out as frivolous, and never succeeded. (I won every one of those, btw, but had to try them since we weren't about to settle a case we felt had no merit.)