NationStates Jolt Archive

The house passed a bill penalizing lawyers for frivolous lawsuits. I know it's fluff and most likely won't become law but it's got the right idea.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051027/ap_on_go_co/congress_lawsuits

WASHINGTON - The House on Thursday passed a bill that would take away lawyers' licenses if they repeatedly file frivolous lawsuits, the latest in a Republican drive to crack down on what they consider costly abuses of the legal system.

Supporters of the bill, which passed 228-184, said lawsuits deemed baseless by a judge for flimsy facts or faulty interpretations of the law are a waste of court time and often a bonanza for lawyers ? rather than a chance to recoup legitimate damages for clients.

The simplest way to help reduce the problem is to adopt the (Chinese, I think) law that says that if you lose the case you have to pay the court costs. Most law suit factories offer (or were a while ago, anyway) to let you go for free if you don't win any cash, and so you have people who decide that there is nothing to lose but their dignity and roll on ahead.
On the other hand, I think that the best solution to frivolous law suits is simply shooting more people (which people? any people!) in the knee caps. Violence solves everything eventually, if only because we are all too dead to cause trouble.

Well, I don't know how you can define "frivolous" without taking away someone's rights.

That said, I believe that in criminal cases, lawyers should go to jail with their clients.

The simplest way to help reduce the problem is to adopt the (Chinese, I think) law that says that if you lose the case you have to pay the court costs. Most law suit factories offer (or were a while ago, anyway) to let you go for free if you don't win any cash, and so you have people who decide that there is nothing to lose but their dignity and roll on ahead.
On the other hand, I think that the best solution to frivolous law suits is simply shooting more people (which people? any people!) in the knee caps. Violence solves everything eventually, if only because we are all too dead to cause trouble.
I've advocated the first policy for a long time. Loser-pays should make the less ethical lawyers think twice before they pull the handle on the slot machine.

And isn't it the judge who decides what constitutes a 'frivolous' lawsuit? Chances are they aren't holding up their end of the bargain, either.

One way that frivolous lawsuits could be limited is to have indictment hearings for civil cases similar to criminal cases. If one cannot convince a judge that one's case has merit, then there is no point in going further. What happens more often than not is that the defendants are bullied into settling out of court to avoid having to deal with the expense of defending themselves. If frivolous lawsuits could be nipped in the bud before that, then it would be the prosecuting lawyers putting in all the time and effort.

Currently, the only preventative measures available for targets of frivolous lawsuits are declaratory judgements.

The problem is "Who determines if lawsuits are frivolous?" Looking at the Republican moves, it seems the party supports all lawsuits as being frivolous. The only people with the right idea are the doctor and lawyers associations. They are working to get rid of frivolous suits by having a third party doctor examine the merit of the case.