We as individuals don’t need to really worry about judicial tyranny because the decisions on which Darth Kennedy and Our Robed Masters are judicial fiating so badly concern issues that may affect other people (like abortion and homosexual "marriage") but that don’t affect most of us who are just trying to make a living. Right?
WRONG!
That’s what Thomas Sowell says in the conclusion to his recent trilogy on judicial tyranny.
EXCERPTS:
People who complain about the frivolous lawsuits that have outraged some and ruined others financially need to connect the dots to the present Senate controversy over the confirmation of federal judges.
Once judges start disregarding the written law in favor of their own notions, ordinary citizens have no way of knowing in advance what decisions to expect from a given situation. We can read the written law but we cannot read judges’ minds. This means that there is a large and growing gray area around our laws.
That large gray area is a happy hunting ground for lawyers, who can threaten individuals, businesses, and even government agencies with frivolous lawsuits — and get paid off to settle out of court, because nobody knows what is likely to happen in court.
Imagine what would happen if highway signs, instead of saying "65 MPH" said "No Undue Speed" or "Prudent Driving." The lawsuits over traffic laws alone would clog our courts to a standstill.
As bad as uncertainty is to people being sued, it can be worth millions of dollars to a slick lawyer who knows how to concoct frivolous lawsuits and extort money for settling out of court. Such lawyers head for places where there are big bucks — "deep pockets," as they are called.
Among the reasons why this affects ordinary people is that many deep pockets get their money from a lot of much shallower pockets.
When your insurance company has to buy its way out of a frivolous lawsuit, guess whose premiums go up. When developers who are trying to build homes or apartment buildings get sued at every turn by environmental extremists, guess what that does to the rent of apartments and mortgage payments for those who buy houses.
NOTE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA: Judges who are willing to give evironmental extremists what they want may be a chunk of why housing prices in the state are so INSANE and why so many businesses are re-locating out of state.
Lawsuits are only “frivolous” to those who are on the wrong side of them, i.e., the Defendant. Republicans who are leading the charge against “frivolous lawsuits” are also having their campaign coffers filled by those Defendants (insurance companies, the US Chamber of Commerce, large manufacturers, etc.).
If you have a loved one who dies or whose life is made worse as a result of another individual’s negligent or wrongful act, a doctor’s negligent or wrongful performance of his duty, or a manufacturer’s faulty product, are they being frivolous by hiring an attorney to file a tort action in order that the negligent individual is forced to make you whole as a result of their negligence or wrong doing. If you suffer non-economic damages (i.e., other than lost wages), such as a loss of fertility, severe disfigurement, excruciating pain, or the loss of a loved one, should your ability to recover non-economic damages be prohibited or capped.
It’s easy to bash lawyers, who are accused of getting excessive fees as a result of such “frivolous” lawsuits. Unlike the characterizations that you see on television shows such as LA Law, however, the vast majority of lawyers just manage to scrape by and are not wealthy or remotely close to wealthy. Since most these “frivolous” lawsuits are taken on a contingent basis there are many cases into which attorneys put quite a bit of work and for which they may ultimately receive nothing, nada, zip. Tort lawyers generally only get paid when they are successful. Have you ever heard of a doctor who is willing to say that you do not have to pay him unless you get well? (Or, Jimmy, as a professional apologist would you want your salary based upon the number of successful conversions you make.)
The threat of tort action forces organizations and groups an incentive to reform themselves, look at how tort actions have forced the Catholic Bishops to change their lax practices in handling molesting priests. The medical profession also has a very poor record of monitoring and regulating its own. Such organizations only respond when you hit them where it hurts – the pocketbook.
Tort ‘reform’ limits the rights of individuals to hold wrongdoers accountable, while allowing corporate wrongdoers to hide from accountability. Does it always work well? No. But, it is far better than any alternative.
I posted the above.
I would say that there are frivolous lawsuits all the time, because people want someone to blame. A doctor friend of mine told a patient that there was a good chance that a particular surgery wouldn’t cure her, but she went for it anyway. It didn’t work – she sued. The jury saw through the tear-job that the woman did, seeing that the doctor wasn’t neglegent (and told her the chances).
If she had gotten what she asked for, it would have bankrupted my friend, raised his malpractice insurance rates so high he couldn’t pratice anymore, hurt his ability to raise his children, etc. Because someone wanted money.
Yeah, a lot of lawsuits aren’t frivolous, but that doesn’t mean that there are those that are.
“Imagine what would happen if highway signs, instead of saying “65 MPH” said “No Undue Speed” or “Prudent Driving.” The lawsuits over traffic laws alone would clog our courts to a standstill.”
Which is exactly why, in the municipality wherein I am a traffic engineer, we do *NOT*, despite many requests from concerned, well-intentioned citizens, install “SLOW” signs on the city streets! (The idiosyncratic interpretations of “YIELD” are already bad enough.)
Now, as for those Texas signs reading “DRIVE FRIENDLY”…
John:
The fact that the suit against your friend was not successful shows the system works.
Should we scrap the entire court system because it might lead to some injustices.
Do you know how much the doctor was out-of-pocket for that suit? Do you know how much of your medical bills go to paying for such defenses?
Mary:
The malpractice carrier covers the cost of defense. So the doctor should have been out nothing. Just like if you negligently cause an automobile accident and are sued – you do not pay for your defense attorneys your insurance company does.
Sorry, you won’t find me crying a lot of tears over poor doctors. The medical profession does a very poor job of policing itself. Somebody has to do it.
MP3 download, Music CD, Online music
Download the sheet music for your current favorites and explore our … Download sheet music for Grammy®-winning and related titles, composers, and artists…