OT: Bad Mojo

[dmm]

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
david. If the court determines that it is a wasteful court case... The defendents representation fees are paid for as a fine for waisting the courts time.

Also a lawyer can lose his bar if it is seen that he/she is not up to snuff.

1) Having to pay opponent's court costs is a very small risk compared to the potential payoff. There ought to be at least the possibility of punitive damages for causing the defendant needless pain and suffering. And the accuser's lawyer (and his firm) should be liable as well, since usually the accuser doesn't have a pot to pi$$ in.
2) Lawyers almost NEVER get disbarred, as long as they win occasionally and don't do anything clearly illegal. This is the fox guarding the henhouse.

[Yimboli]

Originally posted by dmm:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sachmo:
In this country, when you are at work, you represent your company, so they are liable for you actions.

That never used to be a valid argument, it ought not to be, and increasing acceptance of this argument by juries is crippling American business.

---

Why do you think companies go overseas? To get away from unions, minimum wage, and frivolous lawsuits! *sigh*

[ July 23, 2004, 21:14: Message edited by: Yimboli ]

[Narrew]

[quote]Originally posted by Yimboli:

Why do you think companies go overseas? To get away from unions, minimum wage, and frivolous lawsuits! *sigh*

Some of that is true, but most companies go over seas to get away from the double corporate tax.

Bleh, I couldn't explain it good enough so here is a blurb from Boortz

BoortzCorp, U.S. Since BoortzCorp is a U.S. corporation federal tax regulations will require BoortzCorp to pay federal corporate income taxes on every single penny it earns. It doesn't matter whether that money is earned in the U.S. or not. If BoortzCorp earns $15 Million in Belgium it will not only have to pay whatever taxes are due on those earnings in Belgium, but in the United States as well. Now the U.S. tax laws will allow a credit to BoortzCorp in the amount of the taxes paid to Belgium, but since U.S. corporate income taxes are generally higher than most other nations, there will be additional taxes due to Washington. In some enlightened foreign countries there are no corporate income taxes at all. In that case, the U.S. collects the full amount.
BoortzCorp Bermuda. The corporate management of BoortzCorp is getting a bit tired of paying income taxes to the feds on earnings of overseas subsidiaries. BoortzCorp could expand its business and hire additional people if the earnings could be reduced by lowering the tax burden. So BoortzCorp reincorporates in Bermuda. The home office stays in the U.S., as do all but about five employees. But now the tax laws are different. The BoortzCorp subsidiary operating in the United States will pay corporate income taxes to the U.S. government on earnings made in the U.S. The BoortzCorp operation in Belgium, however, will pay income taxes on earnings realized in Belgium, but will owe nothing to the U.S. government for those earnings. That will leave BoortzCorp with additional cash that can be used to hire additional people, expand the business, or pay dividends to shareholders, many of whom, by the way, live in the United States.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Taxes should be paid depending on where the money is earned.

Warning label: If you do not comprehend and accept the idea of personal responsibility, you may not use this product. If you do not understand this warning label, you may not use this product.

[Instar]

Civil lawsuits can be filed for any reason. Juries go overboard anymore with punitive fees and such. Unless the pipe kit or whatever greatly modified the behavior of the vehicle significantly, you're safe.

[sachmo]

Originally posted by dmm:
This has nothing to do with my proposal. Companies try to pass the buck now, even when they are clearly at fault. My complaint is that companies get sued even when it is not their fault, just because they have deeper pockets than the at-fault employee, and (this is the key point) there is no risk to the suer to try this tactic.

My point is that there should never be a risk in suing a company, and it should always be left up to a judge to determine if the case has merit enough to be heard, and up to a jury if the company is indeed at fault.

I do not have a problem with damage limits, though. Some of the awards in these cases boggle the mind.

[ July 25, 2004, 03:18: Message edited by: sachmo ]