| |
| In This Section | | |  |
|
|
Archive for July, 2009
Wednesday, July 15th, 2009
Tort reform is any attempt to reduce or limit the ability of an injured party to seek compensation in a civil lawsuit. Individuals in favor of tort reform argue that limitations placed on civil wrongs help reduce the glut of frivolous lawsuits that occur each year. They also see tort reform as a way to reduce high costs associated with the U.S. tort system and claim that tort reform will reduce the cost consumers pay for insurance, health care and products.
While reducing the number of frivolous lawsuits and lowering court system costs are, indeed, good ideas, that doesn’t necessarily make tort reform the right solution to the problem.
What many proponents of tort reform fail to mention is that tort reform lowers the level of punishment for negligence or intended injurious acts. In the business world, everything is measured in dollars and cents. If there are fewer legal ramifications for manufacturing an unsafe product, then corporations would worry less about the safety of products entering the marketplace.
Corporate wrongdoing is rampant in our society. Tort law is one of the few real incentives big corporations have to produce products that are safe – if a company knows that a product it manufacturers is deadly, and that a certain percent of people that use the product will be injured and could potentially sue for millions of dollars each, they are motivated to protect themselves and therefore the consumer.
If this incentive was severely limited by tort reform, what would stop companies from going back to putting products as bad or worse than benzene, asbestos, or pharmaceuticals with deadly side effects back in production? Studies related to non-motor vehicle accidental death rates have indicated that tort reforms do, in fact, work to increase death rates.
From a medical standpoint, tort reform is often brought in the form of a statute of limitations. For example, current laws are in place that require an individual to file a claim for malpractice within two years from the date of injury. However, many individuals do not learn of the malpractice until months or years later, when the first symptoms of the unnecessary health ailment arise. By this time, tort reform limitations have made it impossible to seek legal recourse.
In the case of mesothelioma, symptoms may not manifest for decades. In order to ensure that injured parties have a fair chance at receiving compensation, many experts on the subject, including our mesothelioma attorneys, feel that tort reform should be limited as much as possible.
Look for more information about tort reform in our next post in the series.
Tags: asbestos, mesothelioma, tort reform
Posted in legal advice | No Comments »
Sunday, July 12th, 2009
As you know from our What is Tort Reform blog post, tort reform is an attempt to limit an individual’s right to seek financial compensation for wrongs done to them by another individual or organization. Those on the side of tort reform are attempting to change or limit how tort law was meant to work when it was provided for in both the United States Constitution and in every state constitution.
Tort law is fundamental to our legal system. In fact, it dates back hundreds of years, even before our history as a nation. It was part of England’s Common Law and was a way for those who harmed another to be held responsible for their actions.
Then, as now, the idea wasn’t about revenge, as in “I’ll get you back for running over my toe with your wagon!” It was about making certain that if someone was injured due to negligence by another, and had to pay a doctor or could no longer work, that person wouldn’t have to sell a child into servitude or go into bankruptcy because they couldn’t pay their debts…on top of the pain and loss they had already suffered. If someone causes harm, they should do what a group of their peers thinks is necessary to repair the wrong as much as possible.
Our country’s founding fathers recognized tort law to be a fair and essential part of the government and legal system they were building, and they made certain it was provided for by writing it into the Constitution.
Corporate greed (such as you will find in the asbestos industry) has crossed every line to protect their interests, and even the United States Constitution isn’t safe. Proponents of tort reform want to limit the rights provided to you by our founding fathers so they can get richer.
Don’t give up your fundamental and constitutional right to seek compensation! Join our mesothelioma attorneys in the fight against tort reform. Write your representatives, send out emails to everyone you know, and contact organizations against tort reform to see what you can do to help.
Tags: defense tactics, tort reform
Posted in legal advice | No Comments »
Thursday, July 9th, 2009
Tort reform has been a heated topic of debate for quite some time among legal professionals in the United States. For those on the outskirts of the debate, understanding the issues that come along with tort reform can be a little confusing at first.
To understand tort reform, one must understand the definition of a tort. Simply put, a tort is a non-criminal civil wrong that is caused either on purpose or through negligence. Or, to put it another way, torts are civil cases in which an act, intentional or otherwise, has caused injury (physical, mental or monetary). In such cases where a tort is committed, the injured party has the right to sue the wrongdoer for damages.
Examples of torts include medical malpractice, assault, false imprisonment, and negligence, such as in asbestos exposure cases that cause mesothelioma.
Once the definition of tort law is known, understanding tort reform becomes much easier. Tort reform is essentially any attempt to limit someone’s rights to seek redress in a court of law for a civil wrong. The most common form of tort reform is the placement of limitations on the amount that can be sought through a civil suit. For example, a particular medical malpractice case may only allow the injured party to claim a maximum of $100,000. Placing a statute of limitations on the amount of time a person has to file a claim is another example of tort reform; this particular aspect of tort reform has a significant effect on the rights of mesothelioma victims to seek financial compensation for their exposure.
In a nutshell, tort reform proponents seek to limit the liabilities of negligent and knowingly injurious parties. In fact, the strongest backers of tort reform are big corporations and big insurance companies — those with the most to lose by tort lawsuits.
The proponents claim such laws will reduce frivolous lawsuits, therefore reducing the cost consumers pay for insurance and products. As you’ll learn in an upcoming post in the series, tort reform that has already passed has done nothing to decrease the cost the average consumer pays; it’s a diversion to help protect the interests of big corporations and a cover-up to hide the fact that they’re trying to take away your rights to a trial by jury.
Tort reform takes away the rights of the victim. If you are concerned that your mesothelioma case may be affected by tort reform, please contact a SEG Law mesothelioma attorney at 1-866-632-7574.
Tags: asbestos, defense tactics, mesothelioma, tort reform
Posted in legal advice | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 7th, 2009
Most Americans aren’t familiar with the words “tort reform” or if they’ve heard them, don’t really have an understanding of what they mean. However, there is a big movement across the country for tort reform, and the proposed changes to tort law stemming from this movement have the potential to limit the rights of anyone in the country.
“Tort” refers to a collection of laws that govern civil lawsuits. The proposed “reform” stems in great part from a move by large corporations to limit a plaintiff’s right to file a civil lawsuit and to limit, or “cap”, the financial award or “damages” they may receive if they win their case.
Over the next month or so, Simon, Eddins and Greenstone, LLP will be featuring a series of blogs and articles about tort reform. They will address questions such as:
- Who is backing tort reform?
- Why does tort reform benefit large corporations?
- How will my rights be changed by tort reform?
- What does this mean for mesothelioma lawsuits?
- What is SEGLaw’s opinion on tort reform?
- What efforts are being made by those who oppose tort reform?
- What are the proposed damage caps?
These are just a few of the questions our mesothelioma lawyers will discuss in the upcoming Tort Reform posts. Be sure to bookmark the SEG Blog so you stay informed on the topic, and please feel free to submit your questions or comments.
Tags: defense tactics, tort reform
Posted in legal advice | No Comments »
Friday, July 3rd, 2009
As GM, Ford and Chrysler struggle to rebuild in Detroit, their reorganization could have a dramatic impact on the outcome of countless asbestos-related lawsuits.
GM filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on June 1, 2009. According to U.S. laws related to bankruptcy, organizations that file for Chapter 11 are allowed to request that all asbestos-related liabilities be moved into a single trust. Such an outcome could potentially be disastrous for those who have suffered unhealthy asbestos products from GM products.
Presently, asbestos-related cases filed against GM total approximately $648 million. The majority of cases come from individuals who had close contact with brake pads on GM cars. Asbestos has long been a component used in brakes due to its high level of heat resistance.
If GM is successful in rolling all current claims into a single trust, claimants can expect to receive a fraction of what they would likely receive from independent trials.
Presently, the government’s plan for GM is to sell the company’s best assets off to a new corporation. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, a group that includes asbestos claimants, is fighting to block the move. They are seeking to accomplish this by deeming the government sale as unconstitutional, because asbestos claimants were left out of the decision process.
As it stands now, GM is requesting that all current product liability lawsuits be admonished. Such a condition has already been granted to Chrysler as a part of their reorganization package.
This latest development in the restructuring of GM is just the latest example of how tort reform can negatively impact asbestos claimants. By enacting laws that limit a mesothelioma patient’s ability to file and collect fair compensation, the legal system is doing a grave injustice to victims.
If you are concerned that GM’s bankruptcy could affect your right to seek financial compensation for asbestos exposure and mesothelioma, schedule a free consultation with our experienced mesothelioma lawyers. Contact us today.
Tags: asbestos, bankruptcy, GM
Posted in legal advice | No Comments »
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| Are you Eligible for Financial Compensation? |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
