re: Does anyone hope that the La. legislature will pass a "loser pays" law?

quote:

---

A plaintiff attorney who convinces a client to sue when the attorney knows he has a weak chance of winning would be a fool.

---

This almost never happens now. The game of PI is churning a lot of "no liability question" cases.

quote:

---

Now he knows he can tell a client there's no risk if their side loses and just hopes a defendant will settle for a relatively small amount just to get rid of a nuisance lawsuit.

---

Except he is still exposed on his wasted time. Also the notion that corporations just settle nuisance suits is very outdated.

quote:

---

just from the fact that the attorneys on here are screaming bloody murder opposing the idea.

---

Look, I make my money structuring commercial joint ventures in a different state. I have no skin in this game at all, but maybe just maybe you should listen to people who have experience with this stuff.

quote:

---

A plaintiff attorney who convinces a client to sue when the attorney knows he has a weak chance of winning would be a fool. Now he knows he can tell a client there's no risk if their side loses and just hopes a defendant will settle for a relatively small amount just to get rid of a nuisance lawsuit.

---

and yes these suits would likely decrease in volume

but they're a very small % of the system and you're increasing the value of clear liability scenarios (the majority of cases)

quote:

---

This thread has vindicated my opinion that a loser pays reform law would absolutely reduce attorney's compensation just from the fact that the attorneys on here are screaming bloody murder opposing the idea.

---

i'm not screaming bloody murder. i'm explaining how this policy has major potential to increase insurance costs

i think the issue is that people have a very skewed perception of how the pie of litigation is sliced. the vast majority are car wrecks with clear liability. many are small (and often without real damages) that get run up higher than they theoretically should be (often by chiropractors that don't get paid util settlement). 99%+ of these cases settle before court (and most are small)

firms like Morris Bart rely on quantity and not quality. they also rarely directly litigate cases (the cases that require trial often will be farmed to another firm). they make a million small licks a year in a factory-like settlement factory. they take a million small cases with clear liability and keep on chugging along

this law would do nothing to stop the Morris Barts of the world and may make them more money

i'll tell you how to stop this industry: make it easier to target chiropractors or make it illegal for them to defer payment until settlement. if you want to really affect PI law, this is how you do it. it's the headshot