🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Apr3.221706.21665@ncar.ucar.edu> rosinski@ncar.ucar.edu writes:
>In article <1992Apr2.183320.4918@ncar.ucar.edu>, woods@ncar.ucar.edu (Greg Woods) writes:
>
>>This is known as the "deep pocket syndrome" and it is exactly what is
>>wrong with our tort system right now. 
>
>The "deep pocket syndrome" is indeed a problem in society today.  It is
>*not* however, a problem with "the system" per se.  It is a problem with
>*people*. 

You're picking nits. The system essentially *is* the people who use it.
But I agree it is the social attitudes right now that create the problem
and not the idea that one can try to obtain redress when one has been
wronged. The problem is that those who didn't do the wrong are frequently
those required to make redress. You can call it a problem with "the people"
and I can call it a problem with "the system", but it's the same bogus result
no matter how you label it.

>>Another problem is contingency fee attorneys
>
>It would seem from your comment that you are laying blame primarily at the
>feet of *lawyers*.

I didn't say "primarily". My comment implies only partial blame and
says nothing about other possible contributing factors. In this case I
think it is more the legal system than the lawyers themselves. As long
as they can get away with it and make a profit, why shouldn't they
initiate the lawsuits? It's the American (capitalist) way. The problem
is that the system is set up so that they *can* make a profit from it.
They have nothing to lose by initiating a frivolous case. Hell, half the
time the insurance companies will settle out of court because in the long
run it's cheaper to pay off a bunch of small losses that they might have won
in court than to pay the court costs and risk the occasional big loss (juries
are, after all, unpredictable and don't always reach the same conclusion
that seems obvious in the insurance company board room). All I'm saying
is that the system should be changed so that the lawyer won't initiate
the lawsuit unless s/he has a real chance to win the case, i.e. it
should cost you when you sue and lose.

--Greg