re: Tort reform in Louisiana - you can only choose 3

quote:

---

Arbitration is fascist

---

quote:

---

lol this is a really dumb statement

---

Arbitration is a secret “court” system entirely controlled by the industry who put it in its adhesion contract. Insurance would be one example. There’s no appeal. There’s no transparency. Banks and other massive institutions put it in their contracts so they can control the entire process. I’m entirely opposed to insurance companies being able to do it. It smacks of corporate oligarchy and steamrolls individual rights, not the least of which is a right to access to the courts.

Placed in context of this issue - the only ppl it would hurt are ppl who have insurance. If you’re an insured who is stuck in arbitration, your insurance company can do whatever it wants to expose you to an excess judgment, and you have no recourse if they screw up.

The claim against you wouldn’t be arbitratable, so you would have to wait until your insurance company settles with the plaintiff for your case to actually go forward. Because that’s what these dirtbags would do.

It costs a couple hundred dollars to $1000 to file a lawsuit depending on jurisdiction. After that, the judge is paid.

You have ppl having to pay a judge $500 an hour to get a status conference, a discovery ruling or whatever else.

I firmly believe that arbitration should be banned in any transaction that isn’t arms length. I truly and completely hate it.

It’s truly dumb to say something when you know not of what you speak.

Loser pays- should shutdown a ton of the the frivolous lawsuits. Attorney fees capped at 40% plus expenses.

Automatic treble damages with 30% judicial interest that starts from when the carrier should've paid the claim, take away the incentive for carriers to delay payment on valid claims

Stop letting women drive, should eliminate the problem altogether

quote:

---

Automatic treble damages with 30% judicial interest that starts from when the carrier should've paid the claim, take away the incentive for carriers to delay payment on valid claims

---

This is basically the law now, and should remain so.

The problem is that you have to sue an insurance company to get them to pay that, and there is no incentive for them to pay it. They just hold on to the money and earn revenue on their reserves until they settle for less.

My thought is start the penalty at an automatic 10%. Increase by 10% for every month of non payment. When you get to 30% add atty fees. Increase monthly until claim is settled.

The only people that suffer in the current insurance climate are people with insurance. I’m more interested in what helps them than what helps Gordon or what helps insurance companies.

quote:

---

Then perhaps he shouldn't take a frivolous case?

---

quote:

---

If he takes a frivolous case and loses, then he doesn’t get paid.

---

"frivolous" is just a buzz word. They don't know what it means and use it to describe a lawsuit they don't like.

quote:

---

11) Two (2) year prescription*

---

Here are some reforms I would propose and fix the spoilage of waiting until the anniversary of the loss to file a suit.

I would shorten this to: “first, a claim must be made to an insurance company within 45 days of the accident”

“after such claim an automobile insurance company has 30 days to provide settlement options”

“a lawsuit must be filed within 6 months of the motor vehicle loss, in the local jurisdiction of the accident”

The fees to file an automobile loss lawsuit should be increased, but waived if the injured party files personally without legal representation.

“If a lawsuit is filed, both parties must appear before a newly created state arbitration district court, where a state district court nominated administrative judicial panel of judges will hear the case to render a ruling”

“after the arbitration ruling, and a party does not agree with the ruling, future legal costs are borne to the loser and plaintiffs attorneys are personally responsible for legal fees incurred”

These proposals would probably never fly, but at least it is a thought.

I would also say possibly a cap on awards, but you would have attorneys filing for the legal cap in their filings. My suggestion would be to place any award for medical compensation for future procedures and doctor visits in a medical legal fund under supervision of the court. There might need to be an entire Division of state District court dedicated to motor vehicle accidents.

The bad faith (in first party property claims) arises from failure to tender the amount due within 30 Days of proving satisfactory proof of loss to the insurer.

Perhaps the language pertaining to “satisfactory proof of loss” can be tightened- but I am VERY opposed to it being defined by the policy language bc that would give the insurer too much leeway in determining when they pay the damages.

I’ve brought some of these suits against insurers. And my experience has been that they just hold on to the $$$$ as long as they can, because they can. Essentially they know they penalty is the same if they pay on day 31 or day 431. So I usually presume they’re in bad faith

All kidding aside, I don’t believe your suggestion would work to get insureds paid faster (which should be the policy goal), bc the insurance company would just wait it out and earn money on the reserves while they wait. At some point their max exposure is fixed and they have way more ability to wait it out, and try to settle on the cheap than an insured.

I would say that in named Hurricanes and other such mass damages, that the insurer may need more than 30 days. Perhaps extend the time to pay in that circumstance (but I think they already do have a little breathing room in that case).

FWIW - I think that there should be a mandatory waiver of flood insurance ((kind of like UM) in all property policies. Basically the carrier provides it (on a pass thru basis) unless insured expressly waives. Would solve a multitude of problems in hurricane matters.

quote:

---

12) Mandatory disclosure of insurance limits at trial to the jury

---

quote:

---

Eliminate attorney advertising

---

Florida already has most of the others and some just would not work

I’d take item 1. Cap general damages.

Doing that, there will be fewer lawsuits, less advertising by trial attorneys, no need to alter minimum insurance requirements.

I don’t see how mandatory disclosure of insurance limits reforms the tort laws. There is no reason why a plaintiff needs to know how much insurance is carried.

Some of the other items are needed but not all

quote:

---

Wrong... Its 15/30/25

---

Correct.

quote:

---

5) Increase mandatory minimum insurance coverage to 25/50/50

---

How about we tell the Black Caucus to get bent and boot everyone that doesn’t have Insurance - with real enforcement?