mdwest
AH ambassador
I get what you are saying about defence costs. One of the things we do better in Canada is we have a loser pays system. If you bring a BS lawsuit and lose the judge will normally order the losing side to pay the winning side's costs or at least a portion of them. In some cases if the case smells bad out of the gate the court will force the plaintiff to pay security for costs into court or post a bond to even allow the case to go forward. It helps reduce bogus cases. You need some sort of filter to cut that down.
Germany has a similar system...
I'd love to see something like that implemented in the US..
Im all about people being able to sue when they truly feel like they have been wronged... even when it gets proven that the law doesnt support their case, Im still ok with it..
but the US courts have a very bad habit of removing common sense from its proceedings and allowing clearly frivolous law suits and shakedown lawsuits to occur.. which costs defendants anywhere from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars when everyone from the defendant, plaintiff, counsel on both sides, and the court itself know the defendant did nothing wrong..
I had a meeting with one of our insurance providers earlier this week.. I was questioning whether or not we needed to keep some riders that have been on one of our corporate policies for the last several years when we renewed, or whether they brought any real protection or value...
as part of the guys sales pitch to try to convince me to keep the additional coverage he told me about an attorney that makes his living by finding employee owned companies (ESOP), finding employees of those companies, and then questioning them about whether or not they are happy with the companys performance (he has no connection to the company and the employees do not know him otherwise).. he convinces them that whether they are happy or not, he can open a class action law suit against management if they can get at least 3 people to say they are not happy and everyone can get paid... as soon as he puts together a case, he then sells it to a large firm that specializes in suing ESOPs, that know its cheaper to simply settle rather than defend even when the case is completely made up and BS...
The guy basically makes a living screwing over companies that have done no wrong.. and ultimately screwing over the people that he convinces to sue (because they are employee owners, they ultimately damage the firm that holds their ESOP retirement accounts.. and the only people that walk away with any substantial amount of money in the process are the attorneys)...
We need a system where bad actors, whether individuals, or the attorneys that intentionally represent them knowing they are bad actors with no real case, get penalized when they pull crap like that...
You might never convince the bad actor to stop trying to sue his way into wealth.. but.. you might make the law firm think twice about representing them when they know the case is bullshit if they had to come up with all of the money associated with the other side fighting them if/when the judge rules the case frivolous..