Hence why I said legitimately frivolous. If you're going to claim every case that had a result you don't like is "frivolous", then the word has no meaning and neither does this discussion.

The jury returns in those Edwards cases shows they were, by definition, not frivolous.

quote:
Otherwise, why would an ambulance chaser take the case up?

Again, this is exactly why loser pays would be bad.

If you got sued by one of these guys and lost, would you want to pay the attorney's fees on top of the damages?

Ambulance chasers don't typically take cases without clear liability. That means in loser pays, they make more money.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by NaturalBeam

Member since Sep 2007

14544 posts

Posted on 1/19/24 at 12:13 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
Again, this is exactly why loser pays would be bad.

Well when people say they want "loser pays" they are really only referring to when the plaintiff loses...

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by NC_Tigah

Carolinas

Member since Sep 2003

124712 posts

Posted on 1/19/24 at 3:37 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
Ambulance chasers don't typically take cases without clear liability.

Good Lord!

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by tadman

Member since Jun 2020

3927 posts

Posted on 1/19/24 at 7:41 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
Ambulance chasers don't typically take cases without clear liability

Once again you are so full of crap it hurts to think about your thought process.

They do indeed take many cases. THen they settle. I've been in the cases. They sue a raft of different companies - if this were an auto accident they sue the companies that made the car, tire, battery, turn signal lights, iphone, wipers, the road, the stoplight...

Then each company's liability carrier pays the plaintiff $100k to go away. $100k X 20 defendants is $2m. Lawyer takes a huge chunk, injured bad driver takes the rest.

Been there, done that. Just because you do speeding tickets doesn't mean the rest of us do.

0 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board