wrote:
On Dec 6, 4:21 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
wrote:

No, I meant the plaintiff's lawyer ... and you knew that.

Yeah, I did.

Although why would the party who was found to have been correct have
to pay the one who was found to have been wrong? Especially since the
plaintiff only wanted $20,000 before trial to just help with her
medical bills, and McD told her to go pound sand?

Having been found to be correct isn't the same as being correct.


However, do you think there should be a "loser pays" rule, also? This
is a favorite of the "anti-frivolous litigation" crowd. Of course,
since the plaintiff won, that would mean that McD would have also had
to pay her lawyer's fees; as would Parker Hannifin had to do in its
case.

I'm generally in favor of that, but we also need some judicial reform to
go along with it. We need to reform the system so that the only basis
for liability is wrongdoing, not the size of your pockets. I also
believe that the burden should be in the individual who buys a product
or service and not on the product maker or service provider. I'm
talking normal cases here and not where a manufacturer as acted
fraudulently, etc.

Matt