re: Make an argument against a "loser pays" judicial system

This thread won't go anywhere unless people accept what the overall outcome of cases are or aren't.

If you believe or experienced Slow's world that most claims are only an issue for damages, then loser pays would be a terrible idea. Right now, the vast majority of claims don't make to trial for whatever reasons.

A plaintiff in Slow's world of loser pays has zero reason to not file suit and see it to the conclusion. This would raise defense costs. The argument of "marginal" cases isn't really in thay scenario.

If you don't believe the above occurs or isn't significant, then perhaps you'll have a different conclusion.