A reader from Australia writes, apropos of no post in particular:
Guys, I broadly agree with your website — personal injury litigation is out of control.
As a lawyer though, I think you’re missing the other side of the coin: that the system for necessary cases, ie suing someone who owes you money, is too long, and too complex. In my view the inefficiency of the legal system is a far bigger problem. Perhaps you could highlight this in some stories?
After all, having a quick efficient legal system to enforce the law is crucial in a modern economy.
3 Comments
Like the communist party the system favors members not foolish infidels that try to grow the economy and build free enterprise or otherwise do what human society should be doing and was doing before lawyers arrived on the scene not so long ago.
It’s two sides of the same coin. Why is suing a big company so expensive and risky, even if you have a legitimate complaint? Because they have high-powered lawyers to defend against all the jackpot lawsuits. Why is it hard to get any kind of lawsuit? Because any rule that aims to stop frivolous lawsuits will also hinder legitimate ones. These are some of the most important, and most hidden, costs of our litigious culture.
Flying is the safest mode of travel on a per mile basis. It is not because of the FAA or lawsuits; people will not fly on planes they believe to be dangerous. Hazardous products are filtered out by good product design and testing. Product liability suits against big companies have to be wrong by the way the market works. Ted Frank’s VIOXX paper demonstates this point beautifully.
Everybody I have ever talked to about the subject believes that one can buy a lawyer to get you out of anything. That was not true for Mrs. Stewart, who was wrongly prosecuted, nor for Mr. Skilling. OJ Simpson was found not guilty before the lawyers said anything.
I have never seen any evidence I know of no evidence to support this universal feeling.