Just doesn’t make sense….

The people who are at fault for the accident, period. No matter what you’re driving…

I think the point is, the person at fault should be held responsible to a degree, but the person who chose to take a motorcycle instead of a safer form of transportation should take some responsibility as well. Don’t you think?

Hey you know the risks of stepping out of your house, you could get killed out there! So if I recklessly run you over, I shouldn’t be responsible.

Poor argument.

My conention in this conversation has two main points…

1. Once a “reasonable award” has been determined by the courts, the remainder (or overage) of the amount awarded by the jury should be placed into the funding to help support Universal Health Coverage.

2. Attorneys shold only be able to erceive a percentage of the “reasonable award” determined by the court. For instance…

If a company is awarded 12 million dollars by a jury, but the court stipulates that 3.2 mil will be the “reasonable amount” awarded to the victim, the attorney will draw his fee from the 3.2 mil, with the remaining 8.8 mil to help pay the cost for Universal Coverage for those who can not afford to pay.

Better the money goes to a good cause than be wasted at the table sin Vegas.

Say for arguments sake that the individual that was injured was making $30,000 a year. Not poverty but not rolling in the money. So we take the $1.3 million and take the attorney’s 33% off the top (approximately $429,000) that leaves him with $871,000. Now divide that remaining amount by his average $30,000 annual income and that would be his income for the next 29 years (approximately). However that doesn’t even TOUCH the amount that will go into medical expenses. With tens, if not hundreds, of thousands in medical expenses it will reduce this amount dramatically. If this is his case (which I don’t know for sure) then he will be lucky to make it to “retirement age” when he can hopefully claim social security (assuming there is any left). It seems like a huge amount of money, and I guess if he invests it properly it could give him a return, but that is generally not the case and they are still going to be fighting at the end of the day.

http://www.localnews8.com/Global/story.asp?S=11503348

as a side note – the dump truck driver likely will not be paying – his employer likely (as required by law) had collision insurance, and that insurance company will be the one to pay – they were the ones paying the defense lawyers, after all.

So- how much is anyone’s sex life worth in addition to the pain?

Before the laws were changed so that juries could award damages, there were many things that were simply very dangerous- ladders, baby carriers, automobiles, furnaces, fabrics, furniture, paint, you name it…. the list goes on forever. We all live in a world full of safer products because of this damage ability, and it seems we’ve gotten too used to it. Lawsuits with damage that is decided by jury has made American made products the safest in the world.

Compare this to the Chinese products- just their drywall, a product invented to make homes more fireproof, has proven to be toxic as all getouts, and has ruined thousands of new homes all over the country. And none of those homeowners can sue the companies that made the stuff.

We can all argue specific cases to pieces, but the laws were made for very rational and good reasons. With every huge jury judgement, there is another where damages are much lower than asked for- sometimes, no damages are adjudged at all.

There are two equal sides to this coin. And I would much prefer having my request for damages to be settled by folks like me than having a judge look through an award book to settle my case. I think most of you would, too, if you were going to court for settlement.

We laughed about it, but it was a really good idea.

When will people learn there is risk, and accept the risk they are taking?

I’m not saying the hospital shouldn’t give free service to make it right the best they can, or even offer restitution best as possible for the loss, but I agree that making someone a millionaire who would have likely never had that kind of money without the mistake is just wrong.

And I agree, putative damages should be thrown out all together, or re-routed to another cause if awarded. The suing party should not have access to putative damages.

But when its a case where the doctor amputates the wrong leg or the nurse administers a dose 10,000 times greater than she should have then you should be able to sue. Preventable medical errors kill thousands of people every year.

I’m not talking about the guy who goes in for treatment that only has a 10% success rate and then sues when it doesn’t work. I’m talking about people who go in for routine treatments and are killed or maimed because of an avoidable mistake.

people need to face the facts that there are risks in life. medical professionals will do the best they can, but humans are human. There are risks. And people should understand there is a chance of human error when they go to a medical professional.

People should take responsibility for the decisions they make. Its the person who selects the doctor after all.

But its more than that, people need to accept there are risks in life. I agree that accidents happen and it shouldn’t ruin someone financially or enrich someone else as a general rule.