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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (13226)	10/21/2003 3:30:34 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793905

It seems like there is not a month that goes by that I don't get a "Class Action" notice in the mail from some cockroach who is suing one of the companies I bought stock in. Asking me to share in the spoils with him. We are now getting to the point in the Senate that every important vote has to be 60/40 to get passed. ___________________________________________________ GOP Pushes Vote to Curb Class-Action Suits Senators Struggle To Beat Filibuster By Helen Dewar Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, October 21, 2003; Page A04 Senate Republicans pushed yesterday for a showdown later this week on long-pending legislation to curb huge settlements from class-action lawsuits but were still struggling for enough votes to overcome a Democratic filibuster. The bill is a priority for President Bush, who has argued it would free businesses to focus on creating jobs. It also represents a potentially decisive moment in the five-year struggle over the issue between Republicans allied with business interests and Democrats with ties to trial lawyers and consumer groups. The House has passed the legislation three times, most recently this spring. But the bill has yet to come to a vote in the Senate, where its supporters have never been able to muster the 60 votes it normally takes to pass such a controversial bill in the 100-member chamber. Class-action suits occur when a lawsuit claiming harm from a defendant's alleged wrongdoing is broadened to include other individuals who might have been affected in the same way, such as buyers of a defective vehicle. Lawyers usually take such cases on a contingency-fee basis, and their compensation is high if the award is large. The legislation would expand conditions under which class-action litigation could be shifted from state courts -- some of which are viewed as highly friendly to plaintiffs and consumer interests -- to the federal system, where redress may be harder to achieve. It calls for removal to federal courts of class-action cases in which there are 100 or more plaintiffs, at least $5 million is at stake and the primary defendant and no more than one-third of the plaintiffs are from the same state. Cases would remain in state court when two-thirds of the plaintiffs are from the same state as the defendant. Judges could determine what happens in cases that fall in between. The bill's backers say it is necessary to keep lawyers from "forum shopping" to find courts -- often in poor, rural areas -- that are the most likely to order the highest damage awards. There is "widespread abuse of class-action lawsuits in our state courts" that result in aggrieved consumers receiving "little or nothing of value while the attorneys receive millions of dollars in fees," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah). Opponents say the cases would further clog federal courts, ensuring delays and other problems. The bill, they say, is aimed at helping the GOP's business friends while hurting the Democrats' trial lawyer allies. It is a "special interest piece of legislation designed exclusively to protect those who are wealthy in America and powerful in America from even being held accountable in court," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). With the bill having passed the House and with Bush eager to sign it, the Senate remains the last obstacle to its enactment. Republicans have said 57 senators, including some Democrats, are ready to proceed. But this is three votes short of the 60 needed to break a filibuster. Republicans said they will seek a vote on the measure Wednesday. Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) said last week he believed Democrats would succeed in stopping the bill, but Republicans have expressed guarded optimism that they can pick up the three votes needed to prevail. If the filibuster fails, Sen. John Breaux (D-La.) intends to bring up a substitute proposal that would, among other things, provide more latitude for state court consideration of cases involving out-of-state defendants. Business lobbyists oppose the proposal, but Breaux contends a compromise is essential for passage of any legislation on the subject. Other "tort reform" initiatives championed by Republicans have not fared well in the Senate. Earlier this year, it sustained a Democratic filibuster against legislation that would limit medical malpractice awards. A proposal to create a trust fund to compensate asbestos victims remains in limbo. washingtonpost.com