If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
right, and that is why i suggested (above) that the reform should be on how
much in fees the lawyers are allowed to collect and not how much a complainant is allowed to receive. it is disgusting how little is paid out to the complainant. fees can still be attractive to the lawyers at one quarter of what they currently collect in such matters. fees as a ratio to the settlement amount can be legislated. limiting the right to sue or limiting the possible reward to the complainant goes against the fundamental principal of a free market economy. "Jerry Park" wrote in message .. . Timothy Daniels wrote: "Jerry Park" wrote: Timothy Daniels wrote: "Nascar12" wrote: There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers. I agree. *TimDaniels* The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers. Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment. If you don't believe that, witness the Vioxx lawsuits. The company making Vioxx determined it might increase mortality and pulled it from the market. Because of that, it is being sued. The companies making similar drugs (Celebrex and Bextra) did not pull their product from the market. They are not being sued. Doing the right thing provides no protection from class action. All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy. Perhaps it is factored into every drug that you buy, but there is still *some* incentive to keep the cost of drugs down so that doctors don't prescribe alternative drugs. On the other hand, how else would consumers be protected from being cheated by large corporations if there could be no class action suits? Do *you* have the resources to sue, say, Microsoft? GE? Toyota? Merril Lynch? Dell? *TimDaniels* No, I don't have the resources to sue someone. If I received a bad product from one of the above listed companies, and the company did not deal appropriately with me, I'd just lose the cost of the product. If, however, someone filed a class action suit against the company that sold me a bad product, I'd still lose the cost of the product and I would pay more for the replacement product. You don't really think anyone BUT lawyers receive anything of real value from class action suits? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park
wrote: Timothy Daniels wrote: "Nascar12" wrote: There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers. I agree. *TimDaniels* The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers. Depends how you look at it. Perhaps the payout from the suite is low, however, the threat of future lawsuits can keep companies honest; so in this sense the public can profit from the action. I think you would agree that it is not enough to trust big business to do the right thing, they are in business to make money and this means push the legal envelope. The Justice Department doesn't have the time to keep every company in line, so we rely on the trial lawyers. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Code4u wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park wrote: Timothy Daniels wrote: "Nascar12" wrote: There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers. I agree. *TimDaniels* The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers. Depends how you look at it. Perhaps the payout from the suite is low, however, the threat of future lawsuits can keep companies honest; so in this sense the public can profit from the action. I think you would agree that it is not enough to trust big business to do the right thing, they are in business to make money and this means push the legal envelope. The Justice Department doesn't have the time to keep every company in line, so we rely on the trial lawyers. I agree that there are 'bad' companies. But most successful companies want to provide a good product at a good price. They do that because it is good for business. A company that has to be 'kept in line' with the threat of a lawsuit, won't be 'kept in line'. They will just see the lawsuit as the cost of doing business. Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits. It hardly matters (in terms of cost) if a company wins or loses such a lawsuit. The cost of winning is extremely high. And everyone doing business with that company pays the increased cost of their product. Class action lawsuits do no good to the complaintants and harm everyone else. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park
wrote: The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers. Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment. Oh, I think the threat of big lawsuits keeps a lot of companies honest that wouldn't be otherwise. So, indirectly, we all do benefit. Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something like that, wouldn't you? -- Top 10 Conservative Idiots: http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Jerry Park" wrote:
Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits. And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous" and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on the implied assumption that all class action law suits are "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate practices. *TimDaniels* |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Knudsen wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park wrote: The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers. Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment. Oh, I think the threat of big lawsuits keeps a lot of companies honest that wouldn't be otherwise. So, indirectly, we all do benefit. Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something like that, wouldn't you? Certainly. But then, that wasn't a class action ... |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Timothy Daniels wrote:
"Jerry Park" wrote: Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits. And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous" and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on the implied assumption that all class action law suits are "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate practices. *TimDaniels* No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses. To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small benefit is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of business by class action. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Jerry Park" wrote in message . .. Paul Knudsen wrote: Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something like that, wouldn't you? Certainly. But then, that wasn't a class action ... Some of it is daft. Like the girl who was so pleased at her pay raise that she hopped, skipped and jumped back to her desk. She snapped her Achilles Tendon on the way, so sued her employers for not protecting her properly. She won! |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Gosh! Let's turn this thread into a debate about the Bush administration's tort
reform proposal, which would reduce the number of class action lawsuits. Based on 4 years and 2 months in office, one must conclude that ANY initiative by the Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in the United States... Ben Myers On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:22:57 -0000, "GB" wrote: "Jerry Park" wrote in message ... Paul Knudsen wrote: Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something like that, wouldn't you? Certainly. But then, that wasn't a class action ... Some of it is daft. Like the girl who was so pleased at her pay raise that she hopped, skipped and jumped back to her desk. She snapped her Achilles Tendon on the way, so sued her employers for not protecting her properly. She won! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to
the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and switch! ... Ben Myers On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:15:57 GMT, Leythos wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:20:03 +0000, Ben Myers wrote: one must conclude that ANY initiative by the Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in the United States... Ben Myers Got news for you - the people voted and BUSH WON - now face that fact or stop whining. -- remove 999 in order to email me |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
my new mobo o/c's great | rockerrock | Overclocking AMD Processors | 9 | June 30th 04 08:17 PM |