Loser Pays

Socrtease said:
Perhaps we should allow the jury to find at the conclusion of a case where they find no liability that the case was without merit and that the plaintiff should bear the cost of the litigation for the defendant. I might could find that acceptable
Click to expand...

Yep I could go with that.
 
Dungheap said:
There are several negative consequences, a few of which Socrates has stated.

First of all, the fact that you may lose a lawsuit does not necessarily mean that your case was frivolous or wrong-headed and punishing people for pursuing their legal rights in a close case by forcing them to pay the legal fees of the opponent, over which they have absolutely no control, is inequitable. Additionally, the development of the law requires people to pursue cases where the outcome is not set in stone.

Secondly, and most importantly, a loser pays rule benefits the deeper pocket (which really is the whole point of the loser pays movement). Adding the prospect of having to pay a defendant's high-priced attorney's fees in addition to the plaintiff's own attorneys fees should a plaintiff lose would discourage people without money from pursuing legitimate claims more so that exists currently. There are plenty of mechanisms currently in existence to deal with frivolous claims without punishing people with legitimate claims that happen to lose.
Click to expand...

Ok, both points are very valid. I do find it curious that so many others use the loser pays rules then.

Thanks for the feedback.
 
Socrtease said:
Perhaps we should allow the jury to find at the conclusion of a case where they find no liability that the case was without merit and that the plaintiff should bear the cost of the litigation for the defendant. I might could find that acceptable
Click to expand...

That would work for me as well. I "might could" find that acceptable as well.
 
Superfreak said:
That would work for me as well. I "might could" find that acceptable as well.
Click to expand...



There are mechanisms in the federal rules and state rules of civil procedure for doing just that. People do not often employ them. For example, under the federal rule of civil procedure a defendant can offer a settlement at any number it wishes at any point in the case. If the plaintiff rejects the offer of settlement and does not recover more than the offer, the plaintiff is required to pay the attorneys fees of the defendant incurred after the offer was made. Many states have similar rules. Or so I'm told.
 
Dungheap said:
There are mechanisms in the federal rules and state rules of civil procedure for doing just that. People do not often employ them. For example, under the federal rule of civil procedure a defendant can offer a settlement at any number it wishes at any point in the case. If the plaintiff rejects the offer of settlement and does not recover more than the offer, the plaintiff is required to pay the attorneys fees of the defendant incurred after the offer was made. Many states have similar rules. Or so I'm told.
Click to expand...

Like I said... who needs the loser pays rules.... :rolleyes:
 
Dungheap said:
There are mechanisms in the federal rules and state rules of civil procedure for doing just that. People do not often employ them. For example, under the federal rule of civil procedure a defendant can offer a settlement at any number it wishes at any point in the case. If the plaintiff rejects the offer of settlement and does not recover more than the offer, the plaintiff is required to pay the attorneys fees of the defendant incurred after the offer was made. Many states have similar rules. Or so I'm told.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right. The problem is so few defendants actually file offer of settlement in the court. If that happened more then people would pay defense costs more.

I actually represented a guy whose dog went out and jumped another dog being walked by the plaintiff. She went to pick up her dog and got a nick on her calf. less than 3 mm long and 1 mm wide. She had no stiches and the plastic surgeon in the Emergency room wrote a report that the cut would heal well and scarring would be minimal and not noticible at a distance greater than 12 inches. She was not a leg model. She had 900 dollars in meds. She sued for $10,000. We offered $2700 and I submitted an offer of settlement and filed it with the court. It was rejected. I kept anal records on my time spent on the matter. We requested a jury of 6. They awared her 900 dollars to cover her meds and not a penny more. I had $8700 in actual time fees and costs for depositions, (I deposed every witness, the doctors in the ER and the plaintiff). I got a judgement for it all. I filed a judgement lien on her 900 dollar judgement, and garnished her wages.
 
uscitizen said:
That sounded like a loser pays thing to me.
Click to expand...
No she won. The winner paid. We offered her MORE than the jury gave her. She forced us to go to court. Our offer of settlement was 3x bettter than she got. She didn't have 10,000 in damages. She had 900 in damages. She would have made out like a bandit if she had just accepted our offer. This was not a close case. This was someone wanting something for nothing.
 
Socrtease said:
Absolutely right. The problem is so few defendants actually file offer of settlement in the court. If that happened more then people would pay defense costs more.

I actually represented a guy whose dog went out and jumped another dog being walked by the plaintiff. She went to pick up her dog and got a nick on her calf. less than 3 mm long and 1 mm wide. She had no stiches and the plastic surgeon in the Emergency room wrote a report that the cut would heal well and scarring would be minimal and not noticible at a distance greater than 12 inches. She was not a leg model. She had 900 dollars in meds. She sued for $10,000. We offered $2700 and I submitted an offer of settlement and filed it with the court. It was rejected. I kept anal records on my time spent on the matter. We requested a jury of 6. They awared her 900 dollars to cover her meds and not a penny more. I had $8700 in actual time fees and costs for depositions, (I deposed every witness, the doctors in the ER and the plaintiff). I got a judgement for it all. I filed a judgement lien on her 900 dollar judgement, and garnished her wages.
Click to expand...

LMAO.... that should happen more often.
 
Sounds like she lost to me.

but lawyers seem to always win, why I avoid them as much as possible.
Kinda like arms dealers, they seem to win no matter who wins.
 
The best part of the whole thing is when she was required to come to court and sign my clients check to her over to me. I think she actually dropped a tear on the back of the check.

USC I have no idea why you are so sympathetic with this woman. She was offered better than she got from a jury of her peers. We were reasonable. She thought she had won a small lottery. I represent plaintiffs. We represent a woman right now who is 25 years old, had her pelvis shattered by a woman who was watch a movie in her car while she drove. Our client cannot have sex with her husband because of nerve pain. She has to wear sweats and shorts because jeans and pants hurt to wear. Her Doctor says she may NEVER be able to have painfree sex again EVER. And the Insurance company wants to settle for 37,000 dollars when their insured has a 250k/500k policy. we haven't spoken to the insurance company since court ordered mediation except to exchange discovery and depo witnesses. 37k is insulting. We have told them if they are so sure of how reasonable it is to file an offer of settlement. They won't. We are going to court. This shouldn't even be close but the insurance company doesn't think that not being able to have sex is important. We'll see. This is the kind of case that should go to court. Not a 3mm by 1mm nick on the back of the leg.
 
Socrtease said:
The best part of the whole thing is when she was required to come to court and sign my clients check to her over to me. I think she actually dropped a tear on the back of the check.

USC I have no idea why you are so sympathetic with this woman. She was offered better than she got from a jury of her peers. We were reasonable. She thought she had won a small lottery. I represent plaintiffs. We represent a woman right now who is 25 years old, had her pelvis shattered by a woman who was watch a movie in her car while she drove. Our client cannot have sex with her husband because of nerve pain. She has to wear sweats and shorts because jeans and pants hurt to wear. Her Doctor says she may NEVER be able to have painfree sex again EVER. And the Insurance company wants to settle for 37,000 dollars when their insured has a 250k/500k policy. we haven't spoken to the insurance company since court ordered mediation except to exchange discovery and depo witnesses. 37k is insulting. We have told them if they are so sure of how reasonable it is to file an offer of settlement. They won't. We are going to court. This shouldn't even be close but the insurance company doesn't think that not being able to have sex is important. We'll see. This is the kind of case that should go to court. Not a 3mm by 1mm nick on the back of the leg.
Click to expand...

Watching a movie in her car while driving. Unfriggin believable. There is no way a driver should have a line of sight to a movie being played in the car they are driving.
 
Watermark said:
The presence of DVD players in new cars has always perplexed me. It never seemed like a good combination.
Click to expand...
It is now a crime in NM but at the time of the accident was not. Now you cannot have a DVD screen that can be seen from the driver seat.
 
The unintended consequeces of loser pay are much prefferable to the unintended consequences of our current system.
 
Obfuscate said:
The unintended consequeces of loser pay are much prefferable to the unintended consequences of our current system.
Click to expand...


Sure you can expand on that taking into consideration the mechanisms in the current system that provide for loser pays outcomes where the circumstances warrant such an outcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top