re: Eddie Rispone trolling PI Attorneys

quote:

---

exchange for substantially lowering the jury threshold.

---

Help me out there.

Lowering the threshhold would allow more of these cases to be tried in front of a jury, instead of just having the judge decide.

Also, the threshhold is 50K.

1) While I understand some judges are more likely to be favorable to plaintiffs than others, I feel like in certain areas of LA, if not all, juries are even MORE likely to be favorable to plaintiffs.

2) Are the Get Gordon's of the world really taking that many cases below 50K, that this would actually make a difference?

The defendants can always waive the jury trial and go with the judge if they want. Right now, they have no option but to suffer a judge likely elected with support from the plaintiff bar to award up to $50k. Since the VAST majority of auto policies are $50k or less, all plaintiff attorneys have to do is confirm the amount of coverage and make sure their clients keep treating until they’ve exhausted the policy.

quote:

---

And that's my question. While LA jury level is the highest in the nation - is that REALLY the problem?

Who is better qualified to judge whether a "greedy corporation" should pay for "little innoncent Tabitha's" injuries?

1) A corrupt judge bought off by contributions from said PIs (assuming he's not a former PI himself)

2) A jury made up on 6-12 of our finest uneducated locals.

I would think a massive increase in jury trials would just gum up the system even more, not less.

---

In a city like BR or NOLA, the insurance company isn't itching to go to trial. In most of the rest of the state, it would benefit the plaintiff or defendant if there is an impasse and they don't want to go in front of an overtly donated to judge.

and yes, the two year prescription period would be beneficial. insurance companies are more willing to play ball on the front end to avoid legal fees.

quote:

---

The President of the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association was asked multiple times in a deposition back in 2014 if the legacy lawsuits affected or drove away business and couldn't come up with a single example

---

Don Briggs and/or his legal advisor really screwed that thing up. Made him, and the industry, look really bad.

quote:

---

Theres actually a bill in the legislature this session to curb billboard

---

I have my doubts that a legislature comprised mostly of attorneys will get behind that.

Shows absolutely massacred him in that deposition

But you shouldn't be citing legacy lawsuits as the reason oil companies are leaving if you can't back it up

I wonder if he’s been in conversations where operators have discussed concerns about investing in Louisiana with the momentum of the suits building, but he was never cleared to name any of them.

Because I do believe the climate from about 2012 to now has discouraged some investment (Permian being a much greater ROI is a main factor); however, what operator would actually offer their name up as a sacrificial lamb in that case, knowing they might eventually be back in Louisiana for some future development?

quote:

---

I'm sure the lawsuits are a nuisance to the oil giants, but the way Rispone and Louisiana Republicans frame it as the reason the industry is in the shitter in LA is an outright lie.

---

The oil “giants” aren’t the only ones affected, FWIW. Many independents have acquired properties and potential liabilities that they had nothing to do with. While they likely legally inherited those liabilities with the assets, there has also been a run by trial lawyers to collect way more money than what the actual damages are to the surface owner(s).

But you’re correct. The lawsuits aren’t the main reason industry isn’t investing in Louisiana. Return on investment drilling in LA vs drilling in Permian and South TX is. However, I do believe these suits do weigh influence when operators are looking at marginal ROI developments in Louisiana vs other regions where that may not be a concern.

What’s his platform? I might vote for him.

quote:

---

Theres actually a bill in the legislature this session to curb billboard

I have my doubts that a legislature comprised mostly of attorneys will get behind that.

---

It's not the attorneys. The Reillys are going to spike that bill so fricking hard. Never had a chance.