ZZZooommm rant latest

"Juan E Jimenez" wrote in message
. ..
I don't disagree that we need tort reform, but I do disagree that all
lawsuits that are settled out of court have no merit, or are settled
solely
for economic reasons. Many times suits are settled because the defendant
realized that there's no way he/she can win. I think you know that as well
as I do.

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's merit.

Remember, cases get settled out of court because the plaintiff gets a
guaranteed payout instead of rolling the dice and possibly getting nothing.
The plaintiff settles because their case isn't so airtight that they're
assured of a win.
The defendant is more strongly motivated to settle because when juries are
involved because there is no upper bound to what might be awarded.

I'm in favor of capital punishment for stupid juries... summary judgments,
immediately enforced, no chance for appeals!

Eric (Of course, I feel the same way about parking tickets and jaywalking
)

In article , "Eric Miller"
writes:

I don't disagree that we need tort reform, but I do disagree that all
lawsuits that are settled out of court have no merit, or are settled
solely
for economic reasons. Many times suits are settled because the defendant
realized that there's no way he/she can win. I think you know that as well
as I do.

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's merit.

Remember, cases get settled out of court because the plaintiff gets a
guaranteed payout instead of rolling the dice and possibly getting nothing.
The plaintiff settles because their case isn't so airtight that they're
assured of a win.
The defendant is more strongly motivated to settle because when juries are
involved because there is no upper bound to what might be awarded.

I'm in favor of capital punishment for stupid juries... summary judgments,
immediately enforced, no chance for appeals!

Eric (Of course, I feel the same way about parking tickets and jaywalking
)



The problem with taking any civil lawsuit before a jury is knowing the mindset
of the jury. I sat on a civil case once where the plaintiff clearly had no
case but her daddy ran a law firm and needed to give some junior lawyers a
little court experience. I was totally ****ed that I had to waste a week of my
time and lose a weeks income to sit on the damn jury in the first place. Then
I almost puked when four of the lady jurists voted to give the bitch something
just because they felt sorry for her. When I questioned them about why, did
they beleive the defendent was at fault, their answer was no but what
difference did it make, the insurance would pay for it.

It is that very mindset that has led to so many out of court payoffs and the
legal lottery that now exists. Since most lawsuits involving personal injury
will be filed in the home community of the plaintiff, it becomes a real crap
shoot for the defendant as to rather a fair and impartial judgement can be
obtained. All it takes is a pathetic looking defendant, a smart lawyer, a
hometown jury, and the big bad corporation or insurance company to make for
some real bad judgements. Even when the defendants know they can win, the cost
of winning and the potiential for endless appeals can be enough to result in
settlements.

So even losing a lawsuit does not always imply any fault, just sympathy.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's merit.

And I'm saying that that is not correct. Settling out of court can VERY MUCH
say a LOT about a case's merit, depending on the circumstances.

Remember, cases get settled out of court because the plaintiff gets a
guaranteed payout instead of rolling the dice and possibly getting
nothing.

It is very naive to assume that that's the only reason why cases get settled
out of court. And don't tell me that that's not what you're saying. If you
want to rephrase, fine, but in this sentence you are saying that that is the
only reason why cases are settled, and that's an incorrect statement.

I'm in favor of capital punishment for stupid juries... summary judgments,
immediately enforced, no chance for appeals!

Eric (Of course, I feel the same way about parking tickets and jaywalking
)

shrug Let's hope you don't get stuck with jury duty and an immediate
sentence.

Juan

Juan E Jimenez wrote:

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's merit.

And I'm saying that that is not correct. Settling out of court can VERY MUCH
say a LOT about a case's merit, depending on the circumstances.


The key word here is "can". Not "does". Sounds like a lot of double-speak.

Oh, I get it, you're following Clinton's Deposition Testimony Model.

"Warren & Nancy" wrote in message
...

Juan E Jimenez wrote:

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's
merit.

And I'm saying that that is not correct. Settling out of court can VERY
MUCH
say a LOT about a case's merit, depending on the circumstances.

The key word here is "can". Not "does". Sounds like a lot of
double-speak.